Wow, fuck that other person. I can't believe someone could be so heartless as to not only root for someone to kill themselves, but to vocally express a desire to watch it happen.
EveryMuffinIsNowEncrypted
joined 2 years ago
Oof.
Yep, they're a goner.
Rip the homey.
Default search engine: Google
Text in address bar: site:google.com google
Yeah, people doing that is my fault.
My bad.
I appreciate your insights in the matter, and with 3.0 here I may have to give GIMP another try!
I heard 3.0 came out today but I haven't quite gotten around to trying it out. (I just got home recently, so...) I think I'll go do that now! :)
Edit:
Sigh... Yeah it definitely still needs improvements.
If I copy/paste an image onto a blank canvas (where the canvas is bigger than the pasted image), then press Shift-Ctrl-X to crop to selection; it doesn't work.
So I look it up and find that the Crop to Selection option is located under the Image tab. Okay, so I click Image and go to click Crop to Selection. It's greyed out.
I go to find out why, and according to the Documentation, it is greyed out if "there is no selection for the image".
The Crop to Selection command crops only the active layer to the boundary of the selection by removing any strips at the edge whose contents are all completely unselected. Areas which are partially selected (for example, by feathering) are not cropped. If there is no selection for the image, the menu entry is insensitive and grayed out.
Why it doesn't automatically treat copy/pasted layers as selections is beyond me. Most other paint software (even MS Paint!) does this. It's basic design nowadays.
Just why? Why does GIMP have to hurt me like this? T_T
Edit 2:
And it needs to have Lanczos interpolation available for resizing. At present, it only has Linear, Cubic, NoHalo, and LoHalo, whatever the hell those last two are as I've never heard of them before.
Yeah, I'm still salty that Google and most other search engines have cut out some of the boolean operators over the last decade or so.
.........Touché.
Oh that.
Yeaaaah that gets kind of annoying I imagine...
I feel ya there, friend. Haha.
I think this example just confused me honestly. Sorry.
Put another way, though, is it basically like a sock being pushed so far inward that it goes inside-out and gets bigger again?
Okay, so it's likely to happen. I never disputed that. But just because the VP says he intends for it to happen still is not the same as a statement by the company that it will happen. He could get vetoed. He could lose his job. There could be a material shortage. Trademark disputes. A kraken could fly through his window and devour his testicles forcing him to be in the hospital on the exact day the paperwork has to be filed.
The fact remains this article is titled in a very clickbaity way because it jumps to the foregone conclusion that "want to do" = "will 100% happen".
Jesus, 12+ hours a day... That is not healthy.
I hope he's doing okay...