You use KiB instead of KB, don't you?

Unless you can download a better performing driver for OS X, this is an argument for using Linux.

...on a particular set of hardware. Notice they're compiling and testing on Apple's low-end machine.

And honestly if your Linux vs. OSX decision is based on a narrow difference in performance, then you probably aren't considering cheap desktop hardware to begin with.

The original trek does have the reputation for taking an idea about humanity and throwing it into a fantasy scenario where we could see the idea evaluated.

Funny, every episode that I've seen that does this seems preachy and forced (especially Kahn). Much like in TNG when Wesley falls into a planter bed on the perfect planet, or DS9 where the religious authority is corrupted by her religion's demons, etc, etc, etc.

I welcome a serious exploration or issues, but it doesn't happen with Trek. Instead it's usually boiled down to the simplicity of what you see in IRobot the movie (AI = bad) vs. I Robot the book (AI = complex). The best episodes in Trek are the ones where Picard has to truly defend humanity and our cherished value against the onslaught of tests by the omnipotent Q. But that's too "deus ex machina" for people. Guess what? "Deus Ex Machina" is a term coined from medeval morality plays where the message was the point.

According to the article:

The team concluded that the presence of meters upon site registration, for example, is not as effective as when the meters are not associated with a registration,

Soo... the summary sentence actually says nothing. What was the result? It also sounds like they're reporting on whether people noticed the meter, not whether the meter was successful in getting people to use better passwords.

Sounds like QT isn't leveraging hardware decoding for some reason, most likely because they're doing their own screenwriting instead of leveraging DirectX calls. I remember older versions of QT on windows having buried preferences, but they probably aren't there anymore.

It's very similar to e-ink, the way LCD is similar to the same technology that's been powering your clock for 30 years.

"Color e-ink" is a good shorthand way of thinking about it.

Samsung just bought Liquavista in 2012.. interesting.. How will that work? I mean Samsung is more than likely going to use this technology.

Well clearly they're not planning to use it and instead are selling it Amazon.

Yes, this is a company with color e-ink technology.

One of the challenges in reading The Plateau Effect: Getting from Stuck to Success is figuring how to classify it. Amazon has it ranked mainly in applied psychology, but also time management and inexplicable personal finance. In some ways it is all of the above and more.

The category you are searching for is "Self Help". Just because it involves computers, it doesn't make it something new and different (just like patents).

A reasoned, though-out answer that I can appreciate. Couldn't you have posted that the first time instead of a vulgar insult? Profanity in the form of a personalized attack doesn't help your argument.

The only reason why this happened is because someone *accidentally* added the functionality when recompiling base dependencies. (http://news.slashdot.org/story/12/04/17/1826215/gimp-core-mostly-ported-to-gegl) For the longest time the Gimp team was claiming CMYK and high-bit-depth channels were impossible to add. That doesn't even get us anywhere close to print production needs like Spot Colors.

The Gimp team also apparently uses their money to send developers to conferences where everyone already knows who they are, instead of spending the money to build a Mozilla/Apache-like foundation, or to send reps to conferences where they would be in front of a new audience. like SIGGRAPH, or other creative-oriented conferences.

Gimp as a product has a long way to go to meet the needs of the people who spend all day, every day, in Photoshop to earn their living. The Gimp organization is doing a horrible job at evangelizing and meeting the needs of those people. Unless they do so, they will never be a Photoshop replacement for professionals. Casual users who can no longer pirate Photoshop will just switch to the underpowered freebee editors that can be found for free, or are included free in their system (iPhoto).

I can see the tie-ins now... Star Wars Sims: Make your Ewok's spend less time brushing their teeth with Crest!

Redhat does it, Canonical does, a few others do it as well.

You're right, and Mozilla and Apache are two great organizations that do it just as well. Why doesn't the Gimp project?

Hmmm..... so I can take my money (or the company's) and spend it on Photoshop and start using what I need right away and get a tax-deductable business expense as a bonus.

*OR*

I can throw some money at the Gimp project and hope someone steps up to build the features I need at some point in the near future. Hopefully they don't just blow the money on a booth at a GNU/Linux convention. (BTW, $600 doesn't go very far in supporting development of new core functionality)

Which option gets me where I need to be for delivering on the promises made to my clients? Which option keeps me employed as a designer / photographer / creative professional? Yeah.... not the Gimp option.

Gimp has a very steep hill to climb, and they keep outright rejecting features (like CMYK and 16bit channels) as impossible (until someone *accidentally* includes it by recompiling base libraries). The Gimp team clearly doesn't want to compete with Adobe. If they did, they'd be approaching the problem completely differently and actively reaching out to successful creative professionals to find out what it would take to switch, and then building those specific requests into the application.

In order to succeed, Gimp needs to do things as well as, or better than Adobe. Not just cheaper.

I remember a little over a decade ago Adobe came from nowhere to own the desktop publishing market with InDesign, against an entrenched challenger which had a virtual monopoly at the time (Quark)... The contrast to the Adobe of today could not be more marked.

They won because they came to market with a fully-functional new product that had no legacy holdovers, and most importantly ran on OSX. Quark was refusing to build an OSX version of their product, completely alienating their core customer base. Of course it also helps that InDesign could be bundled with and integrated well with Photoshop and Illustrator, which almost every Quark user had running on their desktop as well. Adobe's previous product in the marketplace (PageMaker) had long since died off.