It was not well written or even remotely subtle. In fact, I think it's the worst written Star Wars movie ever made. The entire plot relies on a massive string of convenient events. It's like they made up a bunch of action sequences, strapped it all together and started filming. The fact that it's a near retread of A New Hope makes it all the worse.
Time will not be kind to this movie. There's too many problems with it... too many things that don't make sense even for a Star Wars movie. I'd actually welcome another round of prequels over this.
You're essentially arguing that amateur work is professional because it serves a professional purpose. I can get my brother's nephew's cousin who took a design class once to make me a flyer but that doesn't make it professional. Even if I use it to market my business, that in itself doesn't make it professional. Professional work is done by a pro, not by someone who downloaded a program, dropped in some clip art and spent 10 minutes trying to decide between Papyrus or Comic Sans for the text.
All the examples you've given can be done in MS Word, just like html pages can be built in word. That doesn't mean Word is good enough for 99% of actual professional design work, much like GIMP isn't either.
You're part of the problem then. CMYK is absolutely essential and having an image editing program that doesn't support CMYK is like having a database without data types. There is no opposition to this. All image editing software should support RGB and CMYK at a minimum.
Likewise, having a UI that is at least as functional as Photoshop's would be a huge step forward. Professional designers spend a lot of time using image editing software and having a hacked together UI like GIMP's makes the program completely irrelevant.
There absolutely is a way to listen to users. Start with the professional designers who use this type of software daily and work your way down through the different groups of people that have distinct uses for image editing software. Create UI groups and tools that cater to each segment.
As it is, I don't feel GIMP would be appealing to anyone. It's too complicated for the novice, the UI is too clunk for the pro and it lacks essential features like CMYK which means it's not even a consideration for most creative workflows. The only segment of people GIMP seems to appeal to or is targeted at is open source zealots that have their head in the sand.
That's one of the most confusing parts though; the dips in light are not regular. From the article:
"It turns out there are lots of these dips in the star’s light. Hundreds. And they don’t seem to be periodic at all. They have odd shapes to them, too. A planet blocking a star’s light will have a generally symmetric dip; the light fades a little, remains steady at that level, then goes back up later. The dip at 800 days in the KIC 8462852 data doesn’t do that; it drops slowly, then rises more rapidly. Another one at 1,500 days has a series of blips up and down inside the main dips. There’s also an apparent change in brightness that seems to go up and down roughly every 20 days for weeks, then disappears completely. It’s likely just random transits, but still. It’s bizarre."
Canada has been completely screwed over by NAFTA. If we try to enact any kind of environmental protection, a US company sues Canada for millions. It creates a situation where if Canada wants to reduce the amount of water, lumber or other natural resources exported, or more tightly control the extraction of those resources, US companies can succesfully sue Canada for increased costs or lost profit.
It's great that poor countries can see increased growth from this, but the reality is large trade agreements often make a few people companies/people richer while reducing a country's sovreignty and the quality of life of the average joe.
That article is pretty much bullshit. It's written by somoene that worked for Apple for starters and most of the conclusions it draws are wrong. I have a Cintiq Companion so let me provide some counter points:
My take away from this: Don't get rid of your Wacom just yet. iPad Pro is not a professional tool and doesn't stand up well to a similarly priced Surface Pro or the more expensive and industry leading Wacom line of products.
Latency of a stylus is determined by a lot of factors; usually the software, the size of the file being worked on and the computer hardware. The iPad Pro's demo was likely done on a light drawing application with an extremely small image. I have a Cintiq Companion and I can work on a poster size image at 300dpi without latency.
So saying Apple Pencil looks to have much better latency is really disengenous. It's like saying a Logitech mouse has much better latency than an Apple Mouse.
The PC doesn't need AAA games, it's doing plenty fine with kickstarter and indie games completely dominating the platform. Wasteland 2, Shadowrun Returns, RimWorld, Minecraft, Broken Age, Prison Architect, Cities: Skylines, Satellite Reign, Hyper Light Drifter, Star Citizen, Elite: Dangerous... the list goes on and on.
Steam machines don't need to take over either, they're just an alternative to the ever growing platform of choice for gaming. Steam hit 9+ million concurrent users this month and there's no sign of it slowing. If I was Sony, Microsoft and especially Nintendo, I'd be really worried about this. The hardware is becoming irrelevant. What matters is the games and the platform you provide for gaming.
It's amazing how one man can so completely destroy a country, both politically and culturally in under a decade. The CRA (the Canadian version of the IRS) is currently doing audits of non-profit organizations and revoking the non-profit status of organizations that have political ideologies that go against the Conservative agenda.
I can't wait for the next election and I sincerely hope the PC's are so savagaley beaten at the polls that they'll be laughed out of town on the oil wagon they rolled in on.
Almost no games get below 40, while any game that doesn't get 80 or more is considerd a failure. Then you have people giving games 3 out of 5 stars which translates to a score of 60, which skews things even more. Plus tent pole games like CoD can be executed extremely well but offer nothing new so how do you review that? There are games with low interaction (point and click) or high interaction (RTS). How do you compare one against the other? Good reviews are also often given despite massive bugs, incomplete games being released or week 1 launch disasters (like Diablo III).
It's issues like that which make me understand the no score review trend.
Regardless of whether a mission expands or contracts, administrative overhead continues to grow at a steady rate.