or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by jlandd

Winnie Mandela was not Nelson Mandela.
 Commuting on the NYC subway I see plenty.   What really surprises me is how many Android phones, high and mid as well as the obvious low end, I see.   I had imagined them having a smaller ratio than I see.  And, like for island hermit, a Blackberry sighting isn't rare at all.  Weird, considering the amount of doomsday surrounding it. 
   The latest version requires ML, so that limits how far back you can go.  My experience on older Macs with previous versions using a SL version (haven't tried 3.0) was that it was nicely responsive, faster than PS.  But that was on files less than 3500 pixels or so.  On larger files it would do worse and on very large files it misbehaved pretty consistently (wrong filter results, deleting half the image, quitting, etc).  I hope they've taken care of that in 3.0.    I...
One reason I don't think this is inevitable is because Pixelmator relies so heavily on hooking into Apple's Core Image that I'm not sure that they have any code of value to Apple. This is in no way a criticism of what they've put out, but if Apple saw fit to have another image program situated between iPhoto and Aperture they could do it with the same existing system hooks they make available to developers rather than buying any product to obtain it's abilities.
Some people need to work with 16 bit images at least part of the time, so it's a moot point how good Pixelmator is. They stil need something that does. Many keep pestering the developers about this and they've always been a bit evasive. The latest is that they made a cryptic statement about this and the arrival of the new Mac Pros, so if that becomes a reality there will REALLY be some dropping of PS for it.
That would be terrible for the end user. What Pixelmator has going for it, both in the public perception and in reality, is that it is the full priority of the company who own and work on it.
 There's a world of difference between "I'm not worried about it.  Plenty of OS X/iOS apps to use in the mean time." and "I'm not worried about it.  I can use it just fine." I agree with you, but the solution of using something else instead is very meaningful, as in it's kind of a cockup, but since I don't need to use it I'm fine.   :  )
Hi mdriftmeyer, I think you're misunderstanding me. I meant that many people wouldn't want to turn to TextEdit every time they need rtf because it's just a text editor not a word processor.Or am. I misunderstanding you? : )
Good points, and frankly the biggest issue long after any killed features are put back. I have also never received a document file in the format of ANY Apple wp, layout or presentation program. And though I occasionally used them myself I never dared sending it off without first exporting it to a format the receiver could actually read.It's the proverbial tree falls in the forest and nobody hears it. It really doesn't much matter how much damage it did.
No rtf support in Pages?  That's huge.  Some things can't be handled by TextEdit.
New Posts  All Forums: