Microsoft Pauses Work on 'Photoshop Killer' 212
daria42 writes "According to this article, Microsoft has paused development work on some parts of the pro graphics application it first released in beta back in June 2005. The problem? It appears the software giant doesn't see the application as a stand-alone product, but more of a companion piece to its Expression product line. Plus Vista needs to be released first."
PaintbrushShop (Score:5, Funny)
*cough* *explorer* *cough*
I bet in the end, its just gonna be a fancy version of paintbrush
Re:PaintbrushShop (Score:5, Interesting)
Now MS is on the other end- I use Photoshop almost daily. I have to be honest- even if there was a program twice as good (however you measure twice as good) I would be hard pressed to give up a program I have used for a decade (Photoshop) and am used to. Even when I use Fireworks, I have some trouble, because the commands are different/located in different places...
Re:PaintbrushShop (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:PaintbrushShop (Score:2)
It used to be that you pretty much had to have an Apple to do high end graphics. Now I know a ton of graphic designers who use Windows machines. That was unheard of when I was younger.
Masochism (Score:3, Interesting)
What do they do? Surely not prepress. You can get Photoshop for the PC, but trying to ensure colour accuracy on a PC is a nasty, nasty process. It costs far more in time than you save on hardware, and even with the best solutions available you won't have consistent colour across all apps.
Sounds like you know a lot of _web_ designers.
Re:Masochism (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Masochism (Score:2)
I have heard horror stories from print shops who get word docs that people want on the 4 color press....
Re:Masochism (Score:2)
Those customers don't understand what colormatching is yet complain when it is off in the slightest bit.
Re:Masochism (Score:2, Interesting)
One of the big problems under Windows is the lack of a commonly-agreed-upon color management subsystem that all vendors utilize, like Apple has in Kodak's ColorSync (and Linux has in lcms). On Windows, you've got Microsoft's color system, which everybody happily ignores, then Adobe's system, along wi
Re:Masochism (Score:2)
Yes, Windows sucks for color management, and I use a Mac for my imaging work partly for that reason, but I spent years and years doing corporate work in Windows a
Adobe's Price (Score:4, Interesting)
You stop slicing my back, I'll scratch yours.
Re:PaintbrushShop (Score:2, Interesting)
Exactly, and this was recently cited as one of the reasons users will not switch to Lunix or other OSes, because their favourite app had not been ported. IMHO its bad news that MS have paused work on this, because it reduces the chance of Adobe getting annoyed and porting Photoshop to Lunix.
Re:PaintbrushShop (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:PaintbrushShop (Score:2)
Re:PaintbrushShop (Score:3, Funny)
It's a good thing I don't work for Microsoft.
This is why Adobe needs Linux. (Score:4, Interesting)
This concerns all companies that are competing with Microsoft now, or will be in the future. They need to prevent Microsoft from making clones of their programs that will be the Windows "defaults".
I bet IE7 doesn't have Google search as the start page. Can you guess which page might be the default?
Re:This is why Adobe needs Linux. (Score:2)
Re:This is why Adobe needs Linux. (Score:2)
This won't be a built-in to Windows app though. Personally I don't think that Adobe has much to worry about. Think app doesn't even run on Macs.
And as much as it would be nice to see, I don't see how selling Photoshop for Linux would help Adobe at all. Lets say that 5% of Windows users use Photoshop on a regular basis. Linux makes up like 2% of the desktop market. How much of a market does
Re:This is why Adobe needs Linux. (Score:2)
Re:This is why Adobe needs Linux. (Score:2)
Not certain where it stands now since the adobe merger...
I know Fireworks != Photoshop, but it's pretty decent and is a good start. If sales are good, it'll probably demonstrated to Adobe whether they should port for linux or not...
Re:This is why Adobe needs Linux. (Score:2)
Look at te current crop of prosumer digital cameras, they have Adobe sRGB color profiles. It'll be a while if at all before MS comes out with anything considered professional.
Spread Yourself too Thin (Score:2)
M$ is known for that... because why buy Windows, when you can buy Windows + Office + Windows Server + SQL Server?
-M
The Cliché of "Killer" (Score:5, Insightful)
So where does that leave the readers? I'm pretty sick and tired of hearing the word 'killer' used to describe a new product that aims to (hopefully) usurp the leading product in the market. That's it! Let's start using the word 'usurper' over and over to describe a product. It's hip, it generates hype, run with it!
I'm fine with having my intelligence insulted when I read the comments. Hell, I'd even be fine with having low brow advertising on
Re:The Cliché of "Killer" (Score:5, Funny)
Re:The Cliché of "Killer" (Score:2)
Re:The Cliché of "Killer" (Score:2, Funny)
All of those are euphamisms for Chuck Norris
Microsoft Pauses Work on 'Chuck Norris'
Chuck Norris iPod Assassination Attempt
Chuck Norris: Sony's Revolution Killer?
Microsoft's Chuck Norris a Flash Killer?
Microsoft to Launch "Chuck Norris"
Chuck Norris May Be MS Office Killer
Clichés taste good with a
Re:The Cliché of "Killer" (Score:4, Insightful)
- layer styles, including shadows. In Photoshop, you can add a shadow and change it any way you like in something like 5 mouse clicks. The shadow will change if the object changes. Now, Gimp doesn't have any stuff for making shadows at all. So, to make a shadow, you have to duplicate the layer, fill the duplicate with black (or any other color), and blur it. And of course if you draw something on the original layer, you'll have to delete the shadow and draw a new one.
- save for web
- photoshop has more filters, and many can be actually useful
- shadows/highlight (first appeared in Photoshop CS)
If you are doing simple photo editing (brightness/contrast, color levels, resize), Gimp or Krita or Gwenview or even ACDSee will suit you well. If you have never used Photoshop, you'll also have no difficulties in using Gimp.
However when you switch from Photoshop to Gimp you'll be lacking lots of these small-but-useful features that make a 30 second task in Photoshop something like 10 minutes Googling when using Gimp.
Re:The Cliché of "Killer" (Score:2)
Re:The Cliché of "Killer" (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh, and this is all scriptable in Photshop, both visually (via recording your actions) and programmatically (via JavaScript).
Yeah, it might be a little less convenient to do this in aptly named GIMP.
The GIMP is so laughably pathetic compared to Photoshop that only someone who hasn't actually done anything significant with either would compare the two.
Shadows in the Gimp (Score:3, Informative)
It's in the Script-fu menu, along with some other goodies: the (simple) process is explained here: Drop shadows and borders in the Gimp [grcm.net].
Re:The Cliché of "Killer" (Score:2)
Re:The Cliché of "Killer" (Score:2)
I also agree about GIMP 2.0. It's my primary graphics program. I work almost entirely on the WWW, so it does everything I need.
Re:The Cliché of "Killer" (Score:2)
Simply Amazing. (Score:2)
Amazing.
Re:Simply Amazing. (Score:2)
Has anyone actually used it or do you just jump on the "Im a photoshop user and Gimp sucks"?
I use Photoshop on my Mac and I use Gimp with Linux on a daily basis. Gimp's UI is no more retarded than Photoshops. Your opinions are evidence that you don't use it.
Their current UI is much better than Gimp 1.0 but it's not horrible. I can fly through with just as much ease as Photoshop.
Re:Simply Amazing. (Score:2)
Your opinions on the other hand are evident that fans of open source products have a higher tolerance for crappy interfaces just as long as the software remains "free".
Re:Simply Amazing. (Score:2)
True that most OSS apps have an unpolished UI but workflow should also factor in the UI detail.
I can fly around Photoshop just as fast as GIMP.
What is so horrible about GIMP that you are unable to use it?
Re:The Cliché of "Killer" - SIG Question (Score:2)
Are you sure that isn't Bill Clinton speaking?
News? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:News? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:News? (Score:5, Funny)
-
IMHO, sigs are just a wastage of precious bits and bytes.
42 (Score:2, Funny)
Re:42 (Score:2)
Re:42 (Score:2)
Oh come on, this is slashdot. Do you really think we'd stop at 42 when we can mention something that puts M$ to shame? Unless of course you are counting in Base 256 or something...
Expression marketing campaign? (Score:5, Funny)
Genius, I tell you. Pure genius.
I need one of those koosh Microsoft jobs... From where I'm standing, I'm reminded of the Ghostbusters line: "I've worked in the private sector. They expect results."
Re:Expression marketing campaign? (Score:2)
Looks more like they're bending over [microsoft.com] to me...
How else do you explain his Expression?
Beta Version avaliable now (Score:5, Funny)
classic.
Then it's not a "Photoshop Killer" (Score:3, Interesting)
Will they get it right eventually? Probably. Microsoft can afford to throw money at things until they become good, and they have the added advantage of being able to make any product successful just by making it the "default". For this reason, they get a huge headstart over any competitors. Once competitors like Adobe and Google realise this, they might start thinking that switching customers over to Linux is a good idea. On Linux, no company controls the playground, so every application developing company is in there with an equal chance. There's no "default".
Re:Then it's not a "Photoshop Killer" (Score:3, Insightful)
It's not what about what 'can be done', but what would make them the most product. This approach is:
1) Publish 4 as a bundle, which is just as cheap to mass produce as 1 standalone would be.
2) Sell the bundle of 4 at the cost of 3.
4) Profit! The customer thinks they are getting a good deal, though they probably won't regularly
Re:Then it's not a "Photoshop Killer" (Score:2)
God, I hoped not. One thing I consistently dislike about Photoshop is the UI. Microsoft, on the other hand, has a pretty good track record for UI. I had high hopes that Expression Graphic Designer would have a better UI than Photoshop, but with all the goodies.
Alas, I've downloaded the CTP. Less features and a klunky UI. Even GIMP is better. H
Expression vs. Creative Suite or iLife? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Expression vs. Creative Suite or iLife? (Score:4, Insightful)
Expression was neat at the time, but the stylus illustrator plugin improved on it and illustrator 9 or 10 blew it out of the water.
Also, I really see this "Photoshop Killer" being Paint Shop Pro on steroids. I honestly can't see microsoft competing in the pro market at all. The only competing they do is when we get the do-it-yourselfers sending us M$ Publisher files or Powerpoint files that are to be used for output; which results in us needing to rebuild their files from the elements, if possible. or just do a complete re-create.
all I can say is 'ugh.'
Re:Expression vs. Creative Suite or iLife? (Score:2)
Paint Shop Pro on steroids? That is Photoshop. Have you used PSP lately? Paint Shop Pro has many of the capabilties Photoshop is so highly regarded for... Which is why I don't see Microsoft getting very far into this market. Photoshop rules and most people don't know that many, if not all, of the features they love Photoshop for are to be had with alternatives. Certainly, there are still features that only PS has, but those are far fewer than almost anyone out there believes.
Re:Expression vs. Creative Suite or iLife? (Score:2)
however, PSP is NOT a production application. it doesn't do CMYK. it doesn't do color separation. beyond that, I'm not even sure if it supports highres files or any color mode other than RGB.
Re:Expression vs. Creative Suite or iLife? (Score:2)
I think you're pretty much right that the market segment for this isn't true professionals. However, that
The next logical headline is (Score:2)
Microsoft Betas Killer App Killer
Microsoft Expression? (Score:3, Funny)
I tried it.. (Score:5, Interesting)
I was excited about this when it was announced. I've downloaded the betas...umm...it just isn't quite good.
Yes, I understand it is a beta.
But this thing is ugly, it's SLOW and it doesn't seem to be anywhere NEAR Photoshop.
I've downloaded tons on Microsoft betas (working on IE 7 now) and this had to have been the worst that I ever used. I just don't know where this one is heading. People up above suggested that this will be an integral part of the OS and bundled in...
I don't see how it has a chance otherwise...
Not to mention the fact that the world isn't even ASKING for a Photoshop replacement.
I'd like a Photoshop replacement (Score:4, Interesting)
The world might not be, but I am. Photoshop, for all its snazzy tools, is in need of a refresh, one it's not going to get from Adobe. Many bugs have persisted in every version I've used, from 4 to 8 (CS), and the basic interface has never changed. There are lot of usability improvements that could be made.*
I'd personally like Apple or a Mac software outfit like Panic to create a Photoshop competitor. With APIs like Core Image and Core Data available now, much of the groundwork is already laid for a great OS X application. And if I were running Adobe, I'd get a small team of engineers like the ones responsible for Lightbox to start building a Photoshop replacement from the ground up.
* Here's an example of what I mean. To save a
Re:I'd like a Photoshop replacement (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I'd like a Photoshop replacement (Score:2)
Sorry, I should have been more specific that I neither expect nor want a Photoshop competitor from Microsoft on my platform (OS X). However, I do want someone to make a better graphic design application, and I suspect many designers on the Windows side of things would agree.
Partial replacement here today - Aperture (Score:3, Interesting)
Aperture is one such application, making heavy use of both Core Image and Core Data.
While not a replacement for all of Photoshop, it replaces much of what a photographer would otherwise do in Photoshop. And that helps clear the way potentially for something smaller that does the remaining, m
Re:I'd like a Photoshop replacement (Score:5, Informative)
CS is all about workflow andnon-destructive editing. That's why production shops (and I) like it. Even if you did have something that took "6 clicks" to do, you could record it as an action, highlight at which points it should ask you questions if at all and assign it to a key such as F5. Sorry, but your usability problem lies with the user on this one.
Re:I'd like a Photoshop replacement (Score:2)
1) Choose File|Save
Done."
Actually, if you're editing and re-saving a PNG while keeping the layers un-flattened, the process is:
1) Click save in the menu.
2) Re-select the PNG format option, which Photoshop forgets.
3) Re-type or re-select the correct file name.
4) Click the save button again, this time in the file dialog.
5) Click "yes" to confirm that I do really want to save it.
6) Tell it once again that I want it non-interlaced instead of interlaced.
6 clicks to save a blood
Re:I'd like a Photoshop replacement (Score:3, Informative)
It forces you to jump through these hoops because this is a dangerous operation: you're actually throwing away data by doing this. I'd rather go through this dialog a hundred times than to once lose my layered copy of an image I've been working on for hours because some UI designer thought it would be "friendly" to have it rapidly save in an unlayered file format without warnings.
Re:I'd like a Photoshop replacement (Score:2)
If you open it unlayered and add no layers, it does quietly save it unlayered. As the grandparent said, it's a good thing that it doesn't just auto-flatten a layered image for you, especially when the format supports both layered and flattened images.
Re:I tried it.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Indeed. In fact, if they bundled Paint.NET [wsu.edu] in with Windows, then this would be perfectly adequate for the vast majority of people. It is that good.
I'm not sure how well Paint.NET stacks up in terms of features against the GIMP. My own personal experience was that it was easier to use, the UI was logical and I was productive with it in a matter of minutes - whereas GIMP just had me getting frustrated and going nowhere quickly.
Re:I tried it.. (Score:2)
Maybe the point is to have an integrated package that will make ready to use UI elements for Vista applications? Part of that was developing some image editing functionality.
I'm not going to stand behind that, just to kick an idea out there. With the complexity of the new UI it seems reasonable to me that MS would want to put an integrated solution out there.
Re:I tried it.. (Score:2)
They weren't asking for a PageMaker replacement, either. Now PageMaker is a footnote in the history of graphic designers and layout editors.
The sick, evil beauty of the MS Publisher coup is that people who didn't even know they wanted or needed PageMaker started using Publisher, because it came from a larger marketing vector and sometimes even simply came with their computers or office suites. (Sound familiar?)
That's how MS
Re:I tried it.. (Score:2)
Not to mention the fact that the world isn't even ASKING for a Photoshop replacement.
It would be amazing if MS could seriously hurt Photoshop with the simple 20%/80% rule and not to sell this separetly, but just an update on mspaint. One of the "little" features that made me like WinXP was the Picture and Fax viewer and viewing folders as thumbnaiils. Oh programs to do the same things have been around, but they'd be something that I'd have to hunt and buy a licen
Re:I tried it.. (Score:2)
Rudderless Ship? (Score:5, Insightful)
I notice too, that they haven't bought anyone out recently. They probably should, because they certainly haven't had much luck with any new product development. UMPC (or, "Newton XP") is going to be DOA.
Instead of "Developers! Developers! Developers!", Balmer needs to be jumping around screaming "Ideas! Ideas! Ideas! Ideas! Ideas! Ideas!"
Re:Rudderless Ship? (Score:2, Informative)
Actually, they are still pretty active on the buyout scene - one particular one that i am thinking about right now is the recent buyout of UMT Portfolio Management software see http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-5998084.html [zdnet.com] for more details.
You probably won't be very interested in this, but it is quite big actually (if only in my field) and is sure to give MS quite a boost in the Project and Portfolio Management software arenas
the Photoshop-killer-killer (Score:4, Funny)
Looks like Vista is the Photoshop-killer-killer
Editorial slant (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Editorial slant (Score:5, Insightful)
Microsoft is not even talking on its website about anything that could position it against Photoshop.
Just see by yourself
http://www.microsoft.com/products/expression/en/g
http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop/overview.
When you tried to 'kill' another product, you generally start to match its features, in this case, both feature list have almost nothing in common.
For me that doesn't make more sense that saying Adobe Illustrator is a Photoshop killer.
BTW, this has already been discussed:
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/06/11/18512
competition with adobe? (Score:2)
It appears another potential market for MS growth (virtualization) is being headed off by the release of free tools for the user, and possible open sourcing (talking about EMC/VMware).
Could Adobe be up to the same, going OSS with file formats to prevent MS from making inroads?
Re:competition with adobe? (Score:2)
http://picasa.google.com/ [google.com]
Picasa really does make navigating large amounts of photos a breeze. Free too, which is always a plus, and the integration with gmail is growing also.
They did what? (Score:4, Interesting)
What happened? Did they run out of programmers?
Re:They did what? (Score:2, Funny)
It will never work. (Score:2)
Heres a thought though; why don't Microsoft stop trying to "kill" everything and work on making their operating systems more secure and robust?
The Perfect Photoshop Killer... (Score:3, Interesting)
Nah... that will never happen.
To add to the guessworking (Score:5, Insightful)
That way, some kinda graphics program is already on your machine when you have Office (and what office doesn't?), it's another thing that you can hand to marketing in an attempt to make OpenOffice look worse, and in a generation or two, they might start to create some "professional" or "enterprize" standalone version when they hit Adobe's market hard enough, when people got used to their "standard".
MS isn't in a hurry. Taking over a market someone else claimed takes time, and time is what they have plenty of.
It'll run faster than photoshop (Score:2)
Mysteriously, it'll run much faster than photoshop....
Clippy Returns! (Score:2, Funny)
Would you like me to:
1. Overwrite all pixels with #000000
2. Overwrite all pixels with #FFFFFF
3. Corrupt your image
4. Save your image in our proprietary format that even we can't read
5. Take you to the Gimp homepage
MS not synonymous with creativity (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:MS not synonymous with creativity (Score:2)
Warning: High levels of sarcasm detected.
Re:MS not synonymous with creativity (Score:4, Insightful)
You can't make Oldsmobiles and then expect to put out the #1 selling sports car in the field as well. GM is just not identified with slick sports cars. Yeah, they have one (the Pontiac Grand Prix), but it's certainly not a top seller.
Re:MS not synonymous with creativity (Score:2)
It doesn't matter if it's good or not, if they replace MSPaint with Paint.net, all the better. Will it kill photoshop? Nope, but I bet quite a few amateur graphics people would purchase Paint.net if it wasn't $1000.
Oh, and people used your same argument when Microsoft made the XBox and look where it's at now.
Re:MS not synonymous with creativity (Score:3, Insightful)
GM is just not identified with slick sports cars. Yeah, they have one (the Pontiac Grand Prix), but it's certainly not a top seller.
Yeah, that Japanese made Corvette sure is putting GM to shame! Um...wait a minute...
expression (Score:5, Insightful)
My biggest worry is that microsoft might suck the soul out of this truly innovative product. It is light-years ahead of any painting program (Which is why MS had to buy it, because to allow it to be independent might mean that its own paint programs might have been out compete, however unlikely, snce it did not have a major distributer around the time it was bought out by MS.) especially if it is used in the right context.
calling it photoshop-killer or positioning it against photoshop is not really the right strategy. Photoshop's core metaphor is that of a photo, so photoshop is especially deft at after effects applied to a photo or the compositing of existing photos. (I'm sure there are people who break the metaphor and create masterpiece digital paintings from photoshop, but nonetheless, original graphics is not photoshop's main domain.) Expression gives you canvas, paint, and a magical brush.
Time will tell what will happen to this product, here's hoping that it doesn't die at microsoft's hands.
Does anybody else think... (Score:2, Interesting)
Does anyone else think that Microsoft's obsession with integrating every damn piece of software that they release is actually hurting their software rather than making it easier to use?
I worked in Visual Studio 2003 for 2 years and waited with baited breath for 2005 (and all the bugs and new features it was promised to bring), it slipped back more than a year because SQLServer 2005 wasn't ready, then Team System wasn't ready... Now it's finally released and it isn't the fantastic piece of software we though
Re:Does anybody else think... (Score:2, Interesting)
Yeah, because the last thing you want in your IDE is an easy and simple way to build, manipulate and deploy your databases. Thats really a silly idea all right. Down with integration!
Or that incredibly slick Office SDK that makes it a absolute snap to bui
You have the right to remain boring... (Score:2)
Why Why Why Why? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Why Why Why Why? (Score:2)
SQL Server 2005 was worth the wait, but they didn't really change as much at the core of it. The facelift on the UI was definitely needed, and a welcome change, but there didn't seem to be enough cha
Expression/Sparkle (Score:2, Informative)
why "default" isnt necessary enough (Score:2, Insightful)
"Old and useless? Ebay that shit." (ebay.com)
"Wanna know more about me? Facebook me." (facebook.com)
"Blog it." (blog.com)
"Sneeze? Use a kleenex."
"Red eye? Photoshop it." (Photoshop)
It's not very easy to unseat the champion when its name is synonymous to the activity it is dominating in.
Ok, for the Final Time, it was NEVER one... (Score:5, Insightful)
Do the idiots writing this stuff or posting reference to this crap even use Photoshop in their life, let alone the MS product?
As a developer, it was VERY CLEAR from MS to us DEVELOPERS that Acrylic was a new XAML based drawing application FOR MAKING WINDOWS WPF/WinFX APPLICATION AND WEBSITES.
PERIOD.
The features it offers are not even comparable to Photoshop, the closest product on the market that would be 'comparable', would be Deneba Canvas, but Acrylic Designer has NO WHERE NEAR the features set or even tries to.
It is made to make Graphics in XAML format to be put into the "Interactive Designer" or dropped directly in a WPF/Vista/WinFX application, as they are in XAML format.
Why XAML? Because the elements are common objects and not just lines, and can be accessed and programmed to react or move as the application requests, not to be a new 'picture' format or even a SVG killer. I can take a freaking XAML ID/NAME tag and have the line move, reshape, float around, respond to a user clicking it, and all in a 3D Space.
And XAML itself can also define 'behaviors' for the elements in the file format. Not something a normal standard like SVG even tries to do. When SVG is for designing Windows applicaions and can define not only visual elements but also can do object collision and movement, then we will talk.
I get so tired of the "SVG Killer, Flash Killer, Photoshop Killer, Acrobat Killer, blah, blah, blah..."
(And Flash is the closest to reality with expression and XAML, as some people have went on to write little application that are Flash based, although it is not powerful enough to write full scale Windows applications, and here is where the difference lies, not to mention the level of programming difference, the full 3D workspace and design environemnt Microsoft has created.)
Flash will live on doing what it does, but it won't be used to make Windows Applications... Geesh.
MS Expression are tools and technologies for DEVELOPING applications in the new 'Presenation Layer' concept of Windows Vista and WinFX runtime components for XP.
If you don't believe me, actually go use these applications in a 'development' environment (they are free downloads even) and see how they are 'designed' to be the new generation of 'development' tools, adding in elements for 'graphic designers' that are programmible. Your first clue would be to notice that code that lays behind the drawing, and all the items of the drawing have the cute little Object properties that looks more like somthing from Visual Stuido/Visual Basic. And trust me, this is not somthing you find in Photoshop.
If you use Acrylic and think it could ever be a Photoshop killer, then you are smoking something the rest of us are not. It is not even the same type of drawing tool - anyone know Vector/Bitmap differences? Anyone?
Please save our sanity and stop the crap about every thing Mirosoft is doing as being a 'Killer' of some other companies products. Especially development design tools killing Photoshop, jeeez.
Even the new Tablet PC from MS were iPod Killers, how far can you go with this? What next, "The new clock in Windows Vista is a Killer of your home grandfather clock."
If you are posting a link to an article, it should at least be something you 'get' or understand, or you should not be allowed to write the pretext for the link. PERIOD.
Re:Yeah, Great... (Score:2, Insightful)
Yeah, yeah