From: Savageduck on
On 2010-03-08 18:40:16 -0800, tony cooper <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> said:

> On Mon, 8 Mar 2010 13:22:37 -0800, Savageduck
> <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2010-03-08 12:40:57 -0800, Chris H <chris(a)phaedsys.org> said:
>>
>>> In message <snkap5prdnkc7dan3jit6ggkcir43d6lor(a)4ax.com>, Russ D
>>> <russd(a)myowndomain.org> writes
>>>> On Mon, 08 Mar 2010 10:57:51 -0800, nospam <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In article <sy0taMNQ+TlLFA5l(a)phaedsys.demon.co.uk>, Chris H
>>>>> <chris(a)phaedsys.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> All the reviews I can see for Photoline suggest it is on a par with
>>>>>>>> Photoshop elements and is a similar price.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> it looks and feels a lot like the gimp.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So it is not on a level with elements then. Gimp is awful
>>>>>
>>>>> it's not at all. i tried it when trollboy first mentioned it. what a
>>>>> joke. it actually makes the gimp look good, if that's even possible.
>>>>> there was also a striking similarity that it made me wonder how much
>>>>> was lifted from the gimp.
>>>>
>>>> You would be more truthful asking, "how much from Photoline was lifted for
>>>> Photoslop".
>>>
>>> I did not realise that Photoline was over 20 years old...
>>
>> The first public release for Photoline was in 1995.
>> The first Photoshop prototype, "ImagePro" was developed in 1988 and
>> renamed "Photoshop" later in 1988.
>> Adobe purchased a distribution license in September 1988 and Photoshop
>> 1.0 was released by Adobe in 1990.
>> There was nothing "lifted" from Photoline.
>
> Isn't that hook stuck in your mouth painful?

Yup, but if feels so good once I rip it out.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

From: Chris H on
In message <2010030813223716807-savageduck1(a)REMOVESPAMmecom>, Savageduck
<savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> writes
>On 2010-03-08 12:40:57 -0800, Chris H <chris(a)phaedsys.org> said:
>
>> In message <snkap5prdnkc7dan3jit6ggkcir43d6lor(a)4ax.com>, Russ D
>> <russd(a)myowndomain.org> writes
>>> On Mon, 08 Mar 2010 10:57:51 -0800, nospam <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In article <sy0taMNQ+TlLFA5l(a)phaedsys.demon.co.uk>, Chris H
>>>> <chris(a)phaedsys.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>> All the reviews I can see for Photoline suggest it is on a par
>>>>>>>with
>>>>>>> Photoshop elements and is a similar price.
>>>>>> it looks and feels a lot like the gimp.
>>>>> So it is not on a level with elements then. Gimp is awful
>>>> it's not at all. i tried it when trollboy first mentioned it. what
>>>>a
>>>> joke. it actually makes the gimp look good, if that's even possible.
>>>> there was also a striking similarity that it made me wonder how much
>>>> was lifted from the gimp.
>>> You would be more truthful asking, "how much from Photoline was
>>>lifted for
>>> Photoslop".
>> I did not realise that Photoline was over 20 years old...
>
>The first public release for Photoline was in 1995.
>The first Photoshop prototype, "ImagePro" was developed in 1988 and
>renamed "Photoshop" later in 1988.
>Adobe purchased a distribution license in September 1988 and Photoshop
>1.0 was released by Adobe in 1990.
>There was nothing "lifted" from Photoline.

Clearly industrial espionage by Adobe to steal photoline's secrets 8
years before photoline was published! Proof of how bad and underhand
photoslop really is....

Obviously the Photoline team completely clean roomed their design and
features. They took nothing from Photslop. They are Gods.

I like this logic. :-)



--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/