×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Novell Suggests Linux Program Replacements

Zonk posted more than 8 years ago | from the gimp-!=-photoshop dept.

358

An anonymous reader writes "As a result of over 14,000 votes since the beginning of January, Adobe Photoshop, Autocad, Dreamweaver, iTunes, and Macromedia Flash are currently the top 5 'most wanted' Windows/MacOS-only applications in Novell's online survey. From comments made by the survey participants, Novell has also listed suggested substitutes for each of the five. What do readers think of these suggestions?"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

358 comments

Dreamweaver and flash ... (5, Insightful)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 8 years ago | (#14732449)

Because then we linux fans can also churn out web pages that are an eyesore, full of bloat, proprietary ...

Yeah ,,, whatever.

Re:Dreamweaver and flash ... (0)

MrPeavs (890124) | more than 8 years ago | (#14732494)

But flash is so pretty!

I suppose though, that is where AJAX and DHTML/XHTML comes into play. You aren't going to be able to create complex animations, but basic pleasing looking animation and transistion can be done.

However, it seems there is a lot of backlash with the word AJAX. I don't exactly get it, I understand the security issues, but not the comment on it being a buzzword.

Re:Dreamweaver and flash ... (2, Insightful)

AKAImBatman (238306) | more than 8 years ago | (#14732651)

I suppose though, that is where AJAX and DHTML/XHTML comes into play. You aren't going to be able to create complex animations, but basic pleasing looking animation and transistion can be done.

If SVG ever becomes standard, we'll be able to do all the animation we want. Current DHTML libraries aren't bad for this, but scaling is hackish, rotation is nonexistent, and shearing is simply out of the question. Not to mention more complex animations like shaped loops (such as the hollow "splats" you might see in an animation as "sound waves" from a speaker). SVG has all these capabilities, and is designed to allow the DOM to be modified.

Some enterprising individuals have already been using XBM files for this [wolf5k.com] , but XBM is only a black and white raster. :(

Re:Dreamweaver and flash ... (3, Insightful)

NutscrapeSucks (446616) | more than 8 years ago | (#14732776)

I suspect most of the Flash-Haters hate it for what it does, and not because it could be replaced by another standards-compliant, but equally annoying technology. (In other words, you won't find anyone who suddenly enjoys "punching the monkey" just because the monkey is in SVG.)

And, as per usual, any discussion about Flash tends to stereotype Linux users as stubborn, backwards types that hate everything that regular people like about computers. Great image to project about yourselves, guys.

Re:Dreamweaver and flash ... (2, Informative)

NoMoreNicksLeft (516230) | more than 8 years ago | (#14732970)

Flashblock.

I've not seen a monkeypunching banner in god, years now.

SVG is nice, I'm using it to do stuff I'd only have been able to do in flash or java before. I've got several interactive diagrams for a webapp of mine, even as you change the parameters, so does the image (there are too many combinations to just switch out one image for another). It's pretty neat. I'm planning on doing even cooler things, including a few 3d applets.

And the best part about it, I do not need a windows machine to run the macrodobe software, nor the $x00 for the software itself.

Re:Dreamweaver and flash ... (3, Funny)

Nutria (679911) | more than 8 years ago | (#14733149)

I suspect most of the Flash-Haters hate it for what it does,
[snip]
And, as per usual, any discussion about Flash tends to stereotype Linux users as stubborn, backwards types that hate everything that regular people like about computers.

And all this time, I thought the reason I hated continuous hypermotion is because I'm an old fart that wants to read the page rather than get distracted by aggrivating monkeys.

Re:Dreamweaver and flash ... (1)

BenjyD (316700) | more than 8 years ago | (#14733724)

I guess you hate ASCII and Unicode as well, because they are used to write spam?

Re:Dreamweaver and flash ... (1)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 8 years ago | (#14733215)

Hey, I love the "9 coronas" and "foamy rants" swf as much as the next person. Unfortunately, too much flash is devoted to aweful ads or really aweful sites. You know what I'm talking about - overly complicated stuff that is supposed to "shock and awe" us about how wonderful your site, and by extension, your product are supposed to be. In those cases, it should be renamed from "flash" to "clash".

Audio in SVG? (4, Interesting)

tepples (727027) | more than 8 years ago | (#14732978)

If SVG ever becomes standard, we'll be able to do all the animation we want.

But does a solution involving SVG allow for synchronized audio? For instance, if I wanted to use SVG instead of SWF to make an animated series such as Homestar Runner or Weebl and Bob, would that work?

Re:Dreamweaver and flash ... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14732515)

maybe you should realize that not everybody cares about your stupid linux hippie goals. next time you take a trip up to brokeback mountain with linus, don't come back.

Re:Dreamweaver and flash ... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14732574)

So you watched that sodomite movie, did you? You sicken me you disgusting faggot.

God will judge you in the end.

Re:Dreamweaver and flash ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14733283)

I don't know about god, but someone has judged you in the end. Over and over and over and over. In the end. Geddit?

Re:Dreamweaver and flash ... (1)

pubjames (468013) | more than 8 years ago | (#14732532)

Dreamweaver makes standard compliant code.

And I think many web developers would love to use a technology that is equivalent to Flash but open and OSS, if such a technology existed and was practical. But it doesn't.

Re:Dreamweaver and flash ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14732708)

the strength of flash is not its technical prowess instead it is the ease of use of the dev software, I am sure canvas can create everything that flash can, its just much tougher than flash.

P.S I mixed flash the dev software and flash the format, I am assuming the /. crowd is smart enough to figure out my comment.

Re:Dreamweaver and flash ... (1)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 8 years ago | (#14732853)

Dreamweaver makes BLOATED code. Its also crap to maintain - click on this, click on that., yadda yada yadda. Only for people who don't know how to write their own scripts to generate web pages that don't suck.

Add in the need for proprietary extensions for database access.

Also, there is nothing to imply that any Linux version of any of these products has to be either open or free.

Re:Dreamweaver and flash ... (4, Insightful)

Southpaw018 (793465) | more than 8 years ago | (#14732655)

IF you have Dreamweaver configured properly, and IF you're not trying to do anything too cute or fancy, and IF you're making a new webpage and not revising an existing one, Dreamweaver can output XHTML 1.0 Strict/CSS 2.1.

Since those three conditions are only ever met under the best of circumstances, I suggest your favorite text editor as a replacement for it. Seriously. Hand coding your pages is just as fast as creating them in Dreamweaver, albeit with a higher learning curve, and what you can craft with the pure code is fantastic.

Re:Dreamweaver and flash ... (2, Interesting)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 8 years ago | (#14732880)

Since those three conditions are only ever met under the best of circumstances, I suggest your favorite text editor as a replacement for it. Seriously. Hand coding your pages is just as fast as creating them in Dreamweaver, albeit with a higher learning curve, and what you can craft with the pure code is fantastic.

Finally, someone who "gets it." Especially since most work IS maintenance work, and its a lot easier to write a perl script and make file to regenerate 100 pages than to load each one and change it.

Re:Dreamweaver and flash ... (1)

mspohr (589790) | more than 8 years ago | (#14733404)

Four of these five applications are only for specialized geek users (who probably voted early and often in this poll). Really, most normal people don't use these programs.

The fifth, iTunes, is a proprietary DRM package that it would be best to stay away from (although it too, is popular in geekdom).

iTunes is more than the iTMS (4, Informative)

Kadin2048 (468275) | more than 8 years ago | (#14733630)

The fifth, iTunes, is a proprietary DRM package that it would be best to stay away from (although it too, is popular in geekdom).

If you could make a program which replicated everything that iTunes does, without the iTMS or DRM functions, I think you'd do what 90% of people want.

I know a lot of iPod owners (and I'm sure there are quite a few here on /.) who have never purchased any music from iTMS and have never had to use a DRMed file. Personally I've only ever bought two, out of a total library of close to 20,000. The Music Store is not iTunes' "killer feature." Ease of use, a basically seamless interface, and tight integration with the iPod are. The new automatic features for subscribing to, downloading, and maintaining Podcasts on an iPod are going to be more important as people realize how cool a thing it is.

But replicating the DRM functions isn't necessarily important in terms of coming up with a free alternative to iTunes, it's replicating that useability experience and other features that is.

Re:Dreamweaver and flash ... (1)

poot_rootbeer (188613) | more than 8 years ago | (#14733710)

Because then we linux fans can also churn out web pages that are an eyesore, full of bloat, proprietary ...

Linux fans aren't happy just churning out bloated eyesore DESKTOP apps anymore!

CAD (4, Insightful)

rjstanford (69735) | more than 8 years ago | (#14732495)

Autocad is, for better or for worse, the standard. Right now, there are no comparable products - its somewhat like suggesting that people use Write instead of Word. For simple stuff, yes, it works just fine (and indeed with just a few enhancements would probably be better than Word for most people). For anything more complex, like most real-world uses of AutoCad (as opposed to folk just doodling around in it), you need a full blown package.

I'm sure there are people running small shops off of [insert your favorite linux cad program here] who can't wait to tell us about them. However, if you're running even a moderate sized shop, you probably need the real thing. Besides, one of the real strengths of ACAD are all of the add ons, like Land Developer Desktop, that you certainly can't get for just any random cad-lite package.

List of alternatives (3, Informative)

jbeaupre (752124) | more than 8 years ago | (#14732805)

I'd have to agree that most alternatives that run on Linux aren't ready yet. But I was surprised to learn Pro/E is availible. http://www.tech-edv.co.at/lunix/CADlinks.html [tech-edv.co.at]

UGS is also porting software. http://www.ugs.com/about_us/press/press.shtml?id=4 367 [ugs.com]

Personally, I'd like to see SolidWorks ported. Yes, I ditched Acad for solid modelers 12 years ago and would be very reluctant to go back.

Re:List of alternatives (1)

MWelchUK (585458) | more than 8 years ago | (#14733672)

"Personally, I'd like to see SolidWorks ported."

Yeah, saw a demo of this a while back. I'm not holding my breath. Solidworks seems tied into the windows platform. For example, similar parts can be described by creating a basic part and specifying dimensions in a spreadsheet, the spreadsheet app is excel. I can't remember any other specifics, it was a few years ago, I can remember feeling a little depressed when I looked for comparable apps (even proprietary) that would run on Linux and provide similar features.

Re:CAD (1)

maeddi (184281) | more than 8 years ago | (#14733239)

AutoCad? Get something real.
As another one already pointed out, Pro/E has a linux version (they have this for a long time).
I have a version of Wildfire1 on my linux install and it works quite fine.
As for Unigraphics, i don't trust their press releases. They are working on a linux version for some years now...
Dassault has a hard time maintaining CATIA on windows, so i don't see a port anytime soon.

I don't know about the mid-range systems (SolidWorks, SolidEdge etc..)

Another problem comes with the graphic card drivers. CAD users and vendors like to have certified drivers...

Re:CAD (1)

burnin1965 (535071) | more than 8 years ago | (#14733527)

"Autocad is, for better or for worse, the standard. Right now, there are no comparable products "

AutoCAD as the standard is probably for worse. ;)

I currently use AutoCAD but I watched a demonstration of Solidworks and it makes AutoCAD look like the ancient design tools concept that it is.

But I would also go so far as to say that VariCAD could replace a large percentage of the work that is done with AutoCAD. I've used VariCAD a bit, until the demo license ran out, and other than learning a different interface it seemed to be a very powerful and fully featured linux CAD program.

Another possibility is Pro/E, which I have only read about and heard others talk about. There is a linux version and from what I've learned it sounds like it can be difficult to learn but it is very powerful.

burnin

Re:CAD (1)

kernelfoobar (569784) | more than 8 years ago | (#14733644)

Anyone remember keycad?
All keyboard controlled, ultimate precision, one pixel at a time. It ran on IBM XTs: boot MS-DOS 3 on one floppy, load keycad on another. HDD, pffft, floppy disk all the way! .... ah, those where the days....

Why? (1, Flamebait)

PeterSomnium (954672) | more than 8 years ago | (#14732502)

Adobe Photoshop : The Gimp Dreamweaver: Bluefish or Quanta iTunes: Amarok And who wants those annoying flash-images anyway :P

Re:Why? (3, Interesting)

Stevyn (691306) | more than 8 years ago | (#14732570)

Yep...there it is...another photoshop = gimp statement. And wait? Bluefish? Nvu maybe, but it too has its drawbacks. Basically if you are a company who is paying some graphics guy $40,000 a year plus overhead, why have them work with inferior products? The cost of windows and photoshop may seem high to hobbiests, but it's a drop in the bucket compared to what you're gonna pay someone to use it. Even if gimp was 90% as good, it still might not make economic sense in the long run.

Re:Why? (2, Insightful)

BenjyD (316700) | more than 8 years ago | (#14732609)

That's the funniest comment I've read in a long time. Such an excellent caricature of the typical Free software advocate stance: offer inferior alternatives where possible without understanding the domain and discount anything else as 'useless'.

Re:Why? (2)

PeterSomnium (954672) | more than 8 years ago | (#14732656)

Don't get me wrong, I paid for Photoshop and Dreamweaver alike, but nowadays I'm switched to linux, and I think Quanta is quite a good replacement for dreamweaver there. And even though the Gimp isnt comparable to Photoshop, it does pretty much all I want it to do, and I assume it does for most people, if they just took the time to learn the program a bit

Re:Why? (1)

BenjyD (316700) | more than 8 years ago | (#14732857)

That's the point, though. Gimp, Quanta are quite good, but the fantatic advocates stretch "quite good as a free alternative to" into "complete replacement for" without properly understanding, or in many cases even using, the free software they are advocating.

Re:Why? (1)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 8 years ago | (#14733554)

No, the fantatic advocates just realize that Photoshop is horribly excessive for 99.9% of end users. So is Gimp. But at least Gimp is not overpriced for 99.9% of end users.

Legitimate animated works do exist (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 8 years ago | (#14733005)

And who wants those annoying flash-images anyway

Try telling that to any fan of Homestar Runner, Weebl and Bob, or any other animated series distributed through the web.

Re:Legitimate animated works do exist (1)

ratboy666 (104074) | more than 8 years ago | (#14733219)

Linux does Flash. No problem at all. I have Flash coming out the Wazoo in my browser.

It Flash AUTHORING that is in question here. Do you author those things? If you do, stick with Windows.

Ratboy.

So you support the monopoly (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 8 years ago | (#14733330)

It Flash AUTHORING that is in question here. Do you author those things? If you do, stick with Windows.

You appear not to want an alternative to Flash to exist. Why would you support such a monopoly? Why should an animator outside the United States have to import products from Microsoft, a United States corporation, and Adobe, a United States corporation, just to make an animation?

Re:So you support the monopoly (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14733711)

Yeah, the US should cut off all international trade!


...oh wait, you'd all be dead within a week if you did that.

Re:So you support the monopoly (1)

Trelane (16124) | more than 8 years ago | (#14733775)

It's OK. Microsoft's gonna "innovate" (i.e. crush the competition via one of their monopolies) in this arena as well with Vista, so it'll simplify our lives even more. Instead of getting sick of two companies, we will just be sick of one! :)

BTW, this should be filed under Yet Another Reason Why Developing on a Monopoly Platform is a Bad Idea in the Long Run, or Why Developers for Windows Are Suckers.

AutoCAD (4, Insightful)

a9db0 (31053) | more than 8 years ago | (#14732503)

From the perspective of a home user / small business those may be options - I've not yet experimented with them all. But medium to large architectural and engineering companies usually have a large investment in training, tools, libraries, and licenses that they are unwilling to give up, especially if it means they might lose one micron of functionality or productivity.

I for one would have no problem writing checks to AutoDesk for AutoCAD if it were ported to Linux.

Re:AutoCAD (1)

tscheez (71929) | more than 8 years ago | (#14732644)

not to mention all the compatibility with all the firm's engineers, consultants, etc. I have not looked at any of the cad programs for a long time, but as far as I know, none have the functionality like the versions of AutoCAD (Architectural Desktop, etc) Is that still the case?

Re:AutoCAD (4, Informative)

hb253 (764272) | more than 8 years ago | (#14733127)

I'm pretty sure that Bentley Microstation and it's associated products are equal to or even better than AutoCAD products.

Re:AutoCAD (1)

Skagit (910458) | more than 8 years ago | (#14732812)

You are totally correct about why big A/E firms stick with Autocad. Any loss in productivity from a switch to a different CAD program would mean big losses, despite a no-damages-for-delay clause. If you include all the extras, like the Desktops from Autodesk and all the little LISP programs floating around for free, it makes sense to fork out the cash. It has so much "drafting style" legacy support that the same program is suitable to people fresh out of college and those that have been doing it for many years. Also, as it is a de facto standard, you can save a file as Release 12, and almost everybody can read it. The industry popularity makes it an almost de facto standard, and if you use something else, you lose some ability to exchange information. They teach it in college drafting classes.

Autocad is like Excel. It will take FOSS a long time to get where Autocad is today. Novell can offer an alternative that will work just fine for a person who never intends to work with another A/E firm or do any 3D work.

It may be that Autocad is what keeps A/E firms on Windows.

Re:AutoCAD (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14733715)

" From the perspective of a home user / small business those may be options..."

As a home/academic user, I've looked....hadn't seen all of these before. But none of them are free/open source, if that matters to you. (It does to me, but I'm a grad student...I don't have $500 to throw at something that may or may not work. From what I've seen, commercial software and F/OSS have about the same chance of working - low. Both fields push software out the door before it's ready. But at least with F/OSS I don't waste money buying junk.)

LinuxCAD looks pretty bad, both from a GUI point of view and in terms of licensing. It's $199 just to _try_ it; the demo link says:
http://www.linuxcad.com/demo_WE_DO_NOT_OFFER_DEMO_ THIS_WEB_SITE_PROVIDES_SUFFIUCIENT_DEMO.html [linuxcad.com]
Please excuse me for not putting all my faith in that.

Arcad's page seems to be German-only, though the program may not be. Again, commercial software - at least maybe you can get a free demo. It seems to be geared heavily towards architecture; I'm not sure how useful it is for drafting a design to send to the machine shop. And no autocad-style command line - which I'm moderately convinced I need in order to get done in any reasonable amount of time.

VariCAD is also not free software, though they have a demo. Again, it looks architecture-heavy. And no command line.

Ditto for Cycas.

Synergy looks like it may be more oriented towards mechanical drawings. However, there's no autocad-style command line in the screenshots.

Re:AutoCAD (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14733769)

I for one would have no problem writing checks to AutoDesk

That's good, because you'll be writing a lot of big ones. Most folks have never even been able to get close to this kind of software, because it's just too damn expensive. Too bad, because 99.99999% of the world has absolutely no way to create and share design documents. It's an exclusive club, populated by overtaxed addicts. It's a hard habit to break: if you need CAD, you need to pay the man.

And pay and pay and pay. Autodesk is notorious for breaking backward compatibility with their own products. And because designers and engineers must share their documents, once the upgrade train starts rolling, everyone in the whole connected web is compelled to upgrade also. And every upgrade comes at great expense, causes a lot of disruption, slows people down, and virtually never provides functionality that results in any real productivity increase.

An open CAD format and at least one good free reference implementation of a CAD package that used it would change the world. How many people with good ideas don't even bother trying to get them off the ground because they just don't have the tools? How cool would it be to be able to mix and match design elements the way web page authors patch together pieces of html? Mix this house with that pool, but swap out the bathroom design and add a garage. Do it yourself at home and then ask an architect to help you finesse the result to meet local building code and permitting requirements. Never mind fat rich Americans, think what might be done in the developing world. It's hard to be an engineer if you have no tools.

As with most software, the real value proposition for our economy is not the software market itself, but the markets served by that software. CAD, just like other applications, should be commoditized. I preemptively call bullshit on anyone who claims CAD is special, and can't be developed or in a F/OSS environment. It would thrive.

Death to Autodesk.

Re:AutoCAD (0, Troll)

jackbird (721605) | more than 8 years ago | (#14733790)

Yeah, but with each release, Autodesk are bigger and bigger dicks about the fact that they're the standard. The arm-twisting they employed to get firms from 2000 to 2005 was unconscionable. A lot of CAD managers dream of the day they can storm Autodesk HQ with pitchforks and torches.

Combine that with the fact that now apparently Revit is the future and ACAD is dead (never mind that nobody seems to really like it), and you have a lot of people looking to jump off that train. Bentley's marketing material really hammers it home - I've never seen anything talk more openly about their competitors abusing their customers.

Obligatory (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14732512)

GIMP fucking sucks! I don't want to read any comments foolishly claiming GIMP is on par with Photoshop. You hear me you hippie Linux nerds?! Don't even say it goddam it!

Re:Obligatory (2, Insightful)

MrPeavs (890124) | more than 8 years ago | (#14732568)

I wouldn't go as far as saying "GIMP fucking sucks!" I do agree, it is no where near being on par with Adobe Photoshop, but it still is a great piece of FREE software. I can honestly say I am more than impressed with what it has accomplished.

It works great for basic and intermediate graphics, anything above that it can be hit or miss. Especially if you are no familure with it. With Photoshop essentially the standard in graphical applications, having to relearn a program like GIMP just isn't worth it in advanced applications. Plus, I think Photoshop has one of the best UI interface layouts I have ever used, Adobe as a whole is great at that.

In conclusion, GIMP does not "fucking suck", it is just different and has its uses.

Re:Obligatory (1)

carlos_benj (140796) | more than 8 years ago | (#14733395)

I really like the GIMP, but I still laid out the coin for Photoshop CS and am getting ready to (behind the curve, I know) pay for the upgrade to CS2. I'm not flush with cash, so I'd love to use the GIMP if it did all that Photoshop does for me and wouldn't cobble up my work-flow (that's a biggie).

Next time you take a Photoshop Tutorial, try to replicate it in the GIMP. Sometimes it's just as easy and other times it's not. It's those other times that keep me on the Photoshop bandwagon.

Oh, by the way, I didn't even have a windows box before taking my photography digital and acquiring Photoshop.

So.... (4, Insightful)

Otter (3800) | more than 8 years ago | (#14732581)

Novell does this survey about "datacenter" usage, in which the "datacenter" needs a replacement not for SAP or Peoplesoft, but for iTunes and World of Warcraft. And their solution is to toss out a bunch of "replacements" with no regard for their functionality.

No offense, but the Linux community already has thousands of 14-year-olds cranking out helpful information like this -- it hardly seems like Novell needs to join in.

Re:So.... (4, Insightful)

SocietyoftheFist (316444) | more than 8 years ago | (#14732881)

You noticed that too? I could only think that why would you offer up a replacement unless you knew the requirements? The replacements for AutoCAD for instance aren't even close to providing all the AutoCAD does and I recally one comment saying that they Linux alternative, "looked pretty slick". Get back to me when you can compare doing a complex task in both.

Slashdotted? (1)

fwice (841569) | more than 8 years ago | (#14732584)

already slashdotted.

Maybe this [nyud.net] will work.

But really, the programs suggested have reasonable alternates that I know of (minus autoCAD, since I haven't used that since college).

Photoshop -- gimp [gimp.org]
itunes -- there are multiple, but i'm still content with xmms [xmms.org]
flash -- HTML web pages. i'm not the only one browsing with flashblock on, for good reason
dreamweaver -- vi [vim.org] & emacs [gnu.org] -- nuf said

H*R in HTML? (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 8 years ago | (#14733126)

there are multiple, but i'm still content with xmms

The word content has two meanings. You used it as an adjective meaning happy, but it is also a mass noun meaning works of authorship other than computer programs. So given that xmms lacks iTunes Music Store, do you find the other kind of "content" through iRATE?

flash -- HTML web pages.

Please point me to the HTML version of Homestar Runner.

Re:Slashdotted? (1)

zakkie (170306) | more than 8 years ago | (#14733483)

About flashblock - isn't easier just to not install Flash in the first place? That's what I do...

Ciao

Zak

Slashdotted already (1)

Jarlsberg (643324) | more than 8 years ago | (#14732602)

Damn. Now I'll never know which Linux app can replace Dreamweaver... ;)

This is good first step -- I want better apps available on the Linux platform. Personally, I'd like to see a good file manager ported to Linux (comparable to Directory Opus 8). So far, every file manager I've tried are either functional copies of DirOpus 4-5 or that old Norton Dos-app.

Photoshop vs Gimp (0, Troll)

Fiachra06 (945611) | more than 8 years ago | (#14732605)

Has anyone considered that regular joe soap computer (windows) users might be put off by using software called (The) Gimp. I use it all the time now but before I switched of to linux on my desktop I would have assumed it had somthing to do with a prono site.

Although, Joe Soap: "I went looking online for some porn and I ended up a photo journalist. I'm so confused."

Re:Photoshop vs Gimp (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14732693)

No, actually - you're the very first person to EVER make that association. That was very insightful. Kudos to you, sir. Do you have any other fresh perspectives on the world of open-source software?

Re:Photoshop vs Gimp (2, Funny)

Draek (916851) | more than 8 years ago | (#14733075)

yes, The GIMP is a porn site, Vi is a program to teach little kids the alphabet, Bluefish Thunderbird and Firefox are the mascots of a cartoon, and EMACS is an old piece of software dating back to the times when mainframes were cool. Wait, that one is actually right...

this is SO going to be a troll-fest... (5, Insightful)

Draek (916851) | more than 8 years ago | (#14732618)

this is so going to be GIMP-vs-Photoshop all over again, with doses of Flash-sucks, Vi-rules, and the usual dose of propietary-app-is-THE-standard and even worse, those OSS-app-must-behave-like-commercial-app trolls, which are the same OSS-doesn't-innovate trolls... for heaven's sake, can't we just have a WEEK without these flamewars? I think it was better when we had a new story every week hailing our new Google overlords...

Re:this is SO going to be a troll-fest... (5, Informative)

vurian (645456) | more than 8 years ago | (#14732654)

Besides, the Gimp isn't the only player in town... In eleven days (Feb. 27), we'll release the rc1 of KOffice 1.5, with Krita 1.5 in it. And Krita has already cmyk, 16 bit support, lab, raw import and lots of other fun features.

Re:this is SO going to be a troll-fest... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14732797)

Cough-ice?

Certainly sounds like someones got a cold ...

Is the word processor in KOffice better? Is the spreadsheet? Is the interface more streamlined? How would it compare to, say, Abiword + Gnumeric, or OpenOffice, or Office?

Re:this is SO going to be a troll-fest... (1)

vurian (645456) | more than 8 years ago | (#14733310)

Yeah, we know... The name isn't all that great. So what? I didn't invent it. And it's got quite a bit of recognition by now. Wouldn't know whether it would be wise to change it at this point in the game.

But tell me... How is a spreadsheet or a wordprocessor relevant when discussing graphics applications? In any case, all applications in KOffice 1.5 are a lot better than they were in 1.4.

Krita on Windows? (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 8 years ago | (#14733086)

Besides, the Gimp isn't the only player in town

Which "town"? I'll explain why an important "town" is cross-platform applications that work on both Microsoft Windows and *n?x.

In eleven days (Feb. 27), we'll release the rc1 of KOffice 1.5, with Krita 1.5 in it. And Krita has already cmyk, 16 bit support, lab, raw import and lots of other fun features.

I've read that the transition from Windows to KDE is easier if you migrate users to the apps one at a time before you switch the operating system and desktop environment. For instance, one would replace Paint Shop Pro with GIMP or Krita before replacing Windows and Explorer with KDE and Konqueror. So how well does Krita work on Microsoft Windows?

Re:Krita on Windows? (1)

vurian (645456) | more than 8 years ago | (#14733257)

The "town" I'm talking about is free graphics applications. Given the context of this story, on Linux, too. Sure, Krita will work on Windows one day, and on OS X, too. It doesn't right now. But that's not relevant when when discussing free equivalents to proprietary applications to run on Linux, is it?

Retraining has a nonzero cost (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 8 years ago | (#14733492)

Sure, Krita will work on Windows one day, and on OS X, too. It doesn't right now. But that's not relevant when when discussing free equivalents to proprietary applications to run on Linux, is it?

So you appear to claim that retraining costs are irrelevant. GIMP has the advantage over Krita that retraining can be performed gradually, applications before desktop environment, and people who have completed retraining to the new desktop environment can exchange files with people who have not. Without a working Krita for Windows, it's not Photoshop keeping me on Windows but instead my knowledge of Photoshop keeping me on Windows and my collection of files in layered formats supported by Photoshop keeping me on Windows.

Re:Retraining has a nonzero cost (1)

vurian (645456) | more than 8 years ago | (#14733685)

No, I'm not claiming anything about retraining costs. I'm claiming that when discussing free graphics applications on Linux, the Gimp isn't the only option anymore. That's all. As Novell recognized: there's the Gimp, Krita and Pixel now -- and Photoshop under wine, but my experiences with that aren't very good. There's some weird bug where I can only paint straight lines...

Oh, and for your collection of Photoshop files: you're chained to Adobe for as long as you value those. You'll never be able to use free software to edit those, you've been caught in the trap. Sure, there was no alternative, I guess, but you've been trapped nonetheless.

Because from Photoshop 7.0 the file format has been closed and it's not possible to get information about it without signing and NDA and promising never ever to build something Photoshop compatible that's not commercial and closed source.

What I should do, of course, is finally begin on that OASIS spec for layered raster images that people have been bugging me about. But I've got a release to get ready first...

Re:this is SO going to be a troll-fest... (0, Troll)

cortana (588495) | more than 8 years ago | (#14733622)

Krikey, Krita sounds like a neat problem. If only there would be a GNOME port? :)

Re:this is SO going to be a troll-fest... (1)

George Beech (870844) | more than 8 years ago | (#14733210)

Don't forget about the this-is-going-to-be-a-trollfest people, don't want to leave them out. They are also in our disscution never going on-topic

The list (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14732626)

Since the site is down, here's the list:
1) The Gimp
2) Blender
3) vi
4) mpg123
5) libascii

Re:The list (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14732699)

I would not use mpeg1123. According to its own site it is not maintaned and has serious security flaws.

Help with next generation GIMP (5, Informative)

brewer13210 (821462) | more than 8 years ago | (#14732629)

No doubt that Photoshop has some features that GIMP lacks, and that professionals can't do without (CMYK color, higher color depth, etc.). The next generation of GIMP will be based on GEGL (Generic Graphical Library) which will provide the bulk of these features, but it's development has been a bit slow. Lend a hand and we can help bring GIMP on-par with photoshop.

http://www.gegl.org/ [gegl.org]

Todd

Re:Help with next generation GIMP (1)

aesiamun (862627) | more than 8 years ago | (#14733044)

Someone who is highly proficient in Photoshop and is a seasoned graphic artist will no doubt not be interested in helping out the Gimp.

They are happy with Photoshop.

Also, it's not that Gimp lacks decent graphics...it lacks features that would replace photoshop.

Define: a bit slow (1)

Reemi (142518) | more than 8 years ago | (#14733410)


Having a look at the CVS repository at Gnome, the last real changes made to any source code was +6 months ago.

Reemi

PhotoShop 7 reportedly works with WINE (3, Interesting)

jdgreen7 (524066) | more than 8 years ago | (#14732635)

As of the most recent release (yesterday), WINE 0.9.8 has reportedly fixed PS7 to run in Linux (obviously x86 only).

Re:PhotoShop 7 reportedly works with WINE (1)

Guspaz (556486) | more than 8 years ago | (#14733354)

Indeed, and the article's suggestions include "Run it under WINE" for some of the programs (Including Photoshop IIRC).

They suggest a few alternatives for Photoshop, but they aren't really relative. We've already had this debate on Slashdot before, and the consensus is that even if Gimp offers the same functionality as Photoshop, unless it presents an identical interface, people aren't going to use it. Professionals using Photoshop are content to continue using Photoshop, and they're not going to switch to Linux if they have to learn Gimp (only to find missing functionality they need).

Personally I think that Gimp's interface is braindead, but that's just me. Gimpshop is a decent first step, but it only does menus. Gimp should have aimed to clone Photoshop's interface from the beginning, in my opinion.

Er...this isn't Novell (5, Interesting)

jnik (1733) | more than 8 years ago | (#14732819)

Novell did the original survey. Desktoplinux.com (a ZD thing, apparently) is suggesting the alternatives.

Aw, crap (2)

jnik (1733) | more than 8 years ago | (#14732869)

So it is Novell...ZD is just taking everything and reslicing it with minimal quotation marks. And not linking the original source. *headdesk*

copy of TFA (1, Informative)

miscz (888242) | more than 8 years ago | (#14732837)

Linux substitutes for "most wanted" Windows-only software

DesktopLinux.com has reported recently on Novell Inc.'s survey of the "most wanted" Windows/MacOS-only applications among Linux users. As a result of over 14,000 votes and comments that have been registered since the beginning of January, some useful suggestions about good Linux substitutes have come to the fore.

Adobe Photoshop, Autocad, and Macromedia Dreamweaver continue to run 1-2-3 in the balloting, according to the online survey currently in progress on Novell's CoolSolutions community website.

"All the feedback and participation has been great thus far. As the survey continues, I wanted to share some of the suggestions that people have made regarding the top-requested applications. They have been both impressive and helpful," CoolSolutions site editor Scott Morris said.

"The more people we can expose to the survey, the more the independent software vendors (ISVs) will listen," he added. "For right now, there appears to be an abundance of software available that we can use while we are waiting for our favorites to be ported to Linux. Take a look and see if you can't find something that fits your needs."

By a good margin, Adobe Photoshop is the one application that most people want ported to Linux, Morris said. Free and open-source software (FOSS) already available for Linux that have similar feature sets to Photoshop include:

* Pixel Image Editor
* The GIMP
* Krita (Part of Koffice)
* Photoshop also works with WINE

"So, if you're looking to get Photoshop ported to Linux, you might give these suggestions a try [in the meantime]," Morris said.

Many suggestions were listed as replacements for Autodesk AutoCAD, including:

* VariCAD, which has a version specifically designed for SUSE Linux
* LinuxCAD
* arcad
* Cycas
* Synergy

"After checking these applications out a little, some of them look pretty slick. If you need a CAD app, check these out," Morris said.

Macromedia has a couple of applications on this Top 10 Most Requested list, Morris said. Two suggestions for what to use in place of a Linux version of Dreamweaver are:

* Nvu
* Windows Dreamweaver, via WINE

"There were a handful of great suggestions for iTunes (replacements)," Morris said. They include:

* AmaroK
* gtkpod
* Syncpod
* Yamipod

Fifth on the list is Macromedia Flash. "Surprisingly, there are actually a number of useful resources already working on Linux," Morris said. Those are:

* SWF Tools
* KToon
* Blender3D (Available directly from YAST)
* SoftImage|XSI

"There are quite a few people taking advantage of making their opinions known," Morris said. "Let's see how many people we can get to take this survey, so the ISVs will pay attention and start porting their products to Linux."

Article Text (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14732882)

Linux substitutes for "most wanted" Windows-only software
Feb. 15, 2006

DesktopLinux.com has reported recently on Novell Inc.'s survey [desktoplinux.com] of the "most wanted" Windows/MacOS-only applications among Linux users. As a result of over 14,000 votes and comments that have been registered since the beginning of January, some useful suggestions about good Linux substitutes have come to the fore.

Adobe Photoshop, Autocad, and Macromedia Dreamweaver continue to run 1-2-3 in the balloting, according to the online survey currently in progress on Novell's CoolSolutions community website.

"All the feedback and participation has been great thus far. As the survey continues, I wanted to share some of the suggestions that people have made regarding the top-requested applications. They have been both impressive and helpful," CoolSolutions site editor Scott Morris said.

"The more people we can expose to the survey, the more the independent software vendors (ISVs) will listen," he added. "For right now, there appears to be an abundance of software available that we can use while we are waiting for our favorites to be ported to Linux. Take a look and see if you can't find something that fits your needs."

By a good margin, Adobe Photoshop is the one application that most people want ported to Linux, Morris said. Free and open-source software (FOSS) already available for Linux that have similar feature sets to Photoshop include:

        * Pixel Image Editor
        * The GIMP
        * Krita (Part of Koffice)
        * Photoshop also works with WINE

"So, if you're looking to get Photoshop ported to Linux, you might give these suggestions a try [in the meantime]," Morris said.

Many suggestions were listed as replacements for Autodesk AutoCAD, including:

        * VariCAD, which has a version specifically designed for SUSE Linux
        * LinuxCAD
        * arcad
        * Cycas
        * Synergy

"After checking these applications out a little, some of them look pretty slick. If you need a CAD app, check these out," Morris said.

Macromedia has a couple of applications on this Top 10 Most Requested list, Morris said. Two suggestions for what to use in place of a Linux version of Dreamweaver are:

        * Nvu
        * Windows Dreamweaver, via WINE

"There were a handful of great suggestions for iTunes (replacements)," Morris said. They include:

        * AmaroK
        * gtkpod
        * Syncpod
        * Yamipod

Fifth on the list is Macromedia Flash. "Surprisingly, there are actually a number of useful resources already working on Linux," Morris said. Those are:

        * SWF Tools
        * KToon
        * Blender3D (Available directly from YAST)
        * SoftImage|XSI

"There are quite a few people taking advantage of making their opinions known," Morris said. "Let's see how many people we can get to take this survey, so the ISVs will pay attention and start porting their products to Linux."

Novell's "most wanted" Windows/MacOS-only applications survey is located here [novell.com] .

All I want from OSS... (1)

Lord Bitman (95493) | more than 8 years ago | (#14732899)

Please, for the love of god, Learn the concept of an MDI.
I have not seen a single OSS (GUI) application which uses this basic interface concept.

I'm sure this is a religious issue, but I've not actually seen the arguments against MDIs.

Re:All I want from OSS... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14733092)

Please, for the love of god, learn the concept of virtual desktops. It's a Unix culture thing [wikipedia.org] , get used to it. It entails ideas like avoiding captive user interfaces and modularity. Keep as much of the core interface in the realm of the window manager. Windows apps never have taken advantage of this concept, mainly because Microsoft doesn't offer it by default. Kinda like how they don't offer security by default (or after patches, for that matter).

Re:All I want from OSS... (1)

ratboy666 (104074) | more than 8 years ago | (#14733134)

Arguments AGAINST MDI

1 - Your window manager provides perfectly good window control -- why would you need this duplicated into the application.

2 - If the window manager is changed, how does MDI accomodate the new controls?

3 - MDI doesn't work with virtual desktops.

There are more problems with MDI, but these are the top three. Basically, NO application should EVER use MDI. Certainly not in a Unix environment.

Ratboy.

Re:All I want from OSS... (2, Insightful)

Theatetus (521747) | more than 8 years ago | (#14733350)

That's better-stated than my comment below. I have a window manager to let me manage windows. I don't need an application to bring its own window manager with it. I mean, I can scream "give me mechanism not policy" until my face turns red but until application designers "get it", I'm going to be stuck having to deal with the fact that Windows has a crappy window manager which forces application developers to bring their own window management capabilities.

Seriously, is there anybody who has spent some time on X11 with a decent window manager who thinks that the Windows window manager is more useable? I'd be really interested to hear some ideas. I've tried OS X's desktop too, it's better than Windows and can almost fake virtual desktops with Expose (and you can set up virtual desktops with a third party utility anyways). But honestly I find Windows' desktop almost unusable after several years of using X11. MDIs can make up for some of those deficiencies in Windows, but on a decent window manager they are close to intolerable.

Re:All I want from OSS... (2, Insightful)

Theatetus (521747) | more than 8 years ago | (#14733227)

I'm sure this is a religious issue, but I've not actually seen the arguments against MDIs.

Oh, that's simple: MDI programs cover up real estate needlessly. If I'm editing a couple of photos in an SDI program like the GIMP, I want the screen area for those photos and whatever tool windows I'm using and nothing else taken up by my graphics manipulation program. Why? Several reasons:

  1. If I'm editing graphics, I'm usually doing it by according to some list of changes someone gave me, which might be in an email or a text file of some sort. If my graphics program is an SDI, I can simply position the viewer for that change list somewhere that's not covered by the image or the tool window. If it's an MDI, I have to resize the whole application, which is a pain in the first place, and I suddenly have to fit all of the app's windows into a single rectangle. If an MDI main window could be reshaped into an arbitrary polygon, it would be at least a little more usable to me.
  2. I'm on Windowmaker, a NeXT-ish environment, which means I tend to navigate by a windowlist I can make pop up with a center-click when my cursor is on a desktop. This means I want free spaces of desktop scattered about around all my windows. That takes manually resizing and placing MDI applications; SDI applications just do it.
  3. Similarly, when I use a windowlist to navigate, I like to be able to jump to a given document open by a given application. If I'm using an MDI, I have to first jump to the application and then activate the appropriate window. This is counterintuitive to me, and a waste of time and motion.
  4. Also similarly (Joel on Software even mentioned this one), if I click on a window I want that to raise it. On that click. I don't want it to raise the "magic window" that contains all the windows owned by that application; I have a docked icon to do that. if an application has two documents open, and it does not have focus, and I click on the document that is behind the other one, I want the document I clicked on to be raised, not having both documents come up with the one I clicked behind the one that was in front of it.

So, to summarize, an SDI let's me position documents anywhere, not just in a resizeable rectangle. An SDI lets me leave blank desktop around my windows. An SDI lets me navigate to arbitrary open documents in multiple ways. When an MDI can do that, I'd like them more.

If I had to generalize, I would say that SDIs are better for people with "generalist" jobs like mine that involve frequent context switches. MDIs might be better for specialists who can open a single application and work in it most of the day.

Re:All I want from OSS... (1)

NoMoreNicksLeft (516230) | more than 8 years ago | (#14733348)

I've not seen any arguments for them, either. You want to cover the entire desktop with a big window that does nothing, other than serve as a desktop replacement for the little windows? Do you somehow cover all of the MDI parent window with them? And if so, why bother having the parent there in the first place?

And if you don't have the child windows covering everything, why waste the space painting up a gray background? You could stick gaim in one of the unused portions, and follow a conversation, or whatever in the hell you need there. MDI is a waste of screen real estate.

Re:All I want from OSS... (1)

SCHecklerX (229973) | more than 8 years ago | (#14733438)

That's because MDI is a horrible UI. Tabs are ok, though. Don't get me started on the way M$ implemented MDI with recent versions of excel.

Misguided Objections and Real Obstacles (2, Insightful)

Ankh (19084) | more than 8 years ago | (#14732972)

If Novell want people - especially corporate users - to move to their Linux distribution instead of using MacOS or MS Windows, then yes, identify the things that are blocking them, and then identify alternatives.

If someone says they need to run Adobe Creative Studio (say), you have three choices:

(1) see if it's possible to give them Linux with some combination of open source/Libre software, and have them be as effective. In a corporate environment this will probably involve training.

(2) see if you can get Adobe Creative Suite (or whatever it is they say they need) to run on Linux, either via a system like WINE or by arranging for the software to be ported.

(3) arrange for the corporation to employ someone else.

People's needs and people's beliefs are not the same. It's not sufficient to say "you could actually work in this totally different way with these tools that are totally unknown to you" because that just creates anxiety, nervousness and distrust. You have to be gentler than that.

There's also motivation -- people may perceive it to be easier to get a job using PhotoShop than a job using GIMP (I am not saying whether it is true or not, but only that people may have this belief).

The hardest place to make changes is at the periphery of an organisation - the people who deal with other groups. For example, the person who receives AutoCAD files from external engineering companies, or the person who works with print firms and ad agencies who say "send me the Quark file and the PSDs for your images", or the external copy editor who says "send me the Microsoft Word file and I'll use Word's revision control to mark all the changes", there are a great many examples. You can't generally get outside organisations to change unless you are a major customer and they are a small firm, but when they are using high end CAD packages licensed at $30,000 per user (yes, that's a real figure) and they have spent, say, $150,000 on training in the past three years, they aren't about to change.

Instead, Novell needs to demonstrate that they have a viable platform for a lot of use cases, and it's clear today that for many people that this means running some existing commercial applications. And furthermore that it isn't only about features of those applications, or which is "better".

Liam

Re:Misguided Objections and Real Obstacles (1)

NorbrookC (674063) | more than 8 years ago | (#14733564)

If Novell want people - especially corporate users - to move to their Linux distribution instead of using MacOS or MS Windows, then yes, identify the things that are blocking them, and then identify alternatives.

Good point, but the alternatives aren't always alternatives. If I have a choice of having to put together an entire suite of alternatives which may not have everything I need, combined with retraining all my user base, versus using a highly functional single program that has an existing trained user base, and easy-to-use UI, guess what I'm going to do? Particularly if that program is (like it or not) the industry standard program?

You have a some choices. 1) You persuade the software company to do a port to Linux. 2) You come up with a Linux app or a set of apps with all the functionality of the "standard" program, that has similar UI, and can interchange files with the standard. 3) You come up with a set of apps that has most of the features, and do your best to persuade people to use it, along with offering plenty of training. 4) You declare that the Linux apps are "good enough" and sneer at anyone who attempts to defend the standard program, and denigrate the program as "bloatware."

Which approach is likely to persuade people? 1&2 are the most likely to succeed, and three stands a pretty good chance. Unfortunately, I see a lot of posters here choosing #4.

Novell's done the Linux community a favor. Whether you use these applications or not (I don't), it gives us an idea of what still needs to be done to make Linux more popular. Like it or not, there is an application barrier. Businesses and people are not going to move away from Windows unless you have the applications they need, and you make it easy for them to do the move. This survey, and the suggestions are a start.

the most desired are ones I never use (3, Insightful)

willCode4Beer.com (783783) | more than 8 years ago | (#14732989)

To me this is kind of funny.
The apps that the most people want are ones that I never use.
On linux I already have IBM WSAD, Eclipse, and the standard dev tools.
I've got Firefox (which I would use on windows if I used it)
I've got Evolution (there is no good Windows equivalent of this)
I've got GAIM so I can use all my IM's in one app
I'm not a graphics person, and I'm really surprised that there are that many of them (so much for photoshop). I don't really do design (so much for autocad) and I'm really surprised there are enough people paying that much money to rank the proggram that high in the survey (unless there are that many pirated versions). As for HTML, the text editor in WSAD or MyEclipse is excellent (everybody knows WYSIWYG editors are evil).

If these are the most desired apps for Linux, then I am very surprised that there aren't more people moving toward it. Seems the apps used 90% of the time by 90% of the population are Web/IM/email. Then again, for typical usage, the OS is really unimportant. Good Web/IM/email apps are available for just about every OS, and I'd bet most consumers probably don't care.

GIMP vs. Photoshop .. again? (2, Insightful)

Trevin (570491) | more than 8 years ago | (#14733062)

This article reminds me of another article [slashdot.org] which explained why professional Photoshop users don't want to switch to The GIMP.

Re:GIMP vs. Photoshop .. again? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14733659)

Yeah but how many of these requests were from "professionals"? With both the GIMP and Photoshop, I have barely got a clue where to start as you seem to have a number of concepts to learn, and way too many features for me to understand.

I suppose it is like the way everyone insists on using MS Word, despite the fact that most users will never get beyond the features found in Wordpad (or is that just me).

Is the article a joke? (2, Funny)

Karma Farmer (595141) | more than 8 years ago | (#14733104)

Seriously, is this article a joke? It's full of the same helpful, informative advice I'd expect from The Onion, like:
After checking these applications out a little, some of them look pretty slick. If you need a CAD app, check these out
I read stuff like this, and I can't figure out if it's sarcasm or stupid.

My opinion: (5, Insightful)

NoMoreNicksLeft (516230) | more than 8 years ago | (#14733232)

Photoshop: No substitute is available. Even if we filter out all the whiny bullshit that some of the graphic artist weenies expect (I want all 4000 commercial photoshop plugins too!), we're still left with things that really matter that Gimp can't do. CYMK is the killer feature. And it's apparently nothing that can be hacked in so easily. There are still some usability issues that need to be addressed (though again, some of the weenies will never be happy unless it matched pixel for pixel). There are undoubtedly major issues that a non-photoshop user like myself aren't even aware of. For now we have Gimp, but it is no substitute.

Autocad: No substitute is available. Again, it's a case of all the commercial plugins... if they really make photoshop worthwhile, well, then they basically *ARE* autocad. They make all the difference. This is going to be a tough act to follow, and worse, there are 100 graphic artist wannabees in open source for every engineer wannabe. I'm not familiar with any of those suggested by the article, but I expect they are pretty much to Autocad what Gimp is to photoshop. No real substitutes available.

Dreamweaver: Nvu. It's pretty damn close. It could be Dreamweaver with not an incredible amount of work. But I hope that we don't do that. Mozilla/Firefox aren't just IE, they're better than it is. That's what Nvu should be, or some branch off of it (know it's Mozilla Composer at its core, but is it OSS or proprietary? I never really checked it out). The best part is, that it shares some heritage with Firefox and Thunderbird, and that means in theory, writing plugins for it should be possible. I think that could be really useful in an application like that.

iTunes: Didn't we just see an article about Songbird here recently? The screenshots look pretty slick. Again, based off of mozilla code, I think this could end up being a replacement, even if it isn't yet. Though nothing would ever satisfy the mac weenies, I suspect.

Flash: Inkscape. It's not there yet, animation isn't ready. They're actually trying to design the interface correctly, rather than just imitate all the other animation software we've seen over the years. Also, they do seem to sort of be waiting for software that can view it (for most purposes, this means browsers that support SVG/SMIL). This will probably be every bit as powerful as Flash... there will be those who disagree of course, but who wouldn't have laughed if you'd suggested that mozilla would be the superior of IE in the beginning?

Re:My opinion: (5, Interesting)

nagora (177841) | more than 8 years ago | (#14733616)

CYMK is the killer feature.

Actually this is a bit of a myth in my experience. I send stuff to printers from Gimp fairly often and CMYK isn't an issue; they just convert it as part of their process.

What IS a killer is spot-colour usage. I have no decent method of working with Pantone or other specialised spot colours, nor is there a good system for handling product shots where a particular colour HAS to be represented correctly, such as a Coke can.

People forget that CMYK can represent less than half the contents of a Pantone swash; it is not the be-all and end-all of colour handling.

TWW

Rhythmbox? (3, Informative)

j00bar (895519) | more than 8 years ago | (#14733263)

I'm surprised that Rhythmbox [rhythmbox.org] didn't make the list of iTunes replacements. It looks like iTunes, it interacts with your iPod in a similar fashion, and it even supports DAAP. Other than the iTMS, it's almost a complete replacement.

-jag

Some people just dont get it. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14733468)

as a Corporate user, I dont care what the OS is. the TOOL you need is all that matters. Dont go well xxx software is free - most corporations dont care.

All Novell said was here is what the Corps want and thats what you should be going for. A Native version for Linux. - not wine, or here is something that can do it. I have Adobe Creative Suite - Cost like $1000 - just to learn another tool, when i have used it for 5 years.. same for any high end tool.

until everyone gets off that everything for linux MUST be OSS, it will never be 50% of the Corporations. What would happen if Oracle buys MYSQL - and Said you must pay for it now.. every linux person would have a fit.

No Viable Visio Alternative (1)

airship (242862) | more than 8 years ago | (#14733721)

Not a word about Visio. If I could find a viable alternative to Visio, I'd drop Windows tomorrow. I already use Firefox, Thunderbird, OpenOffice and a dozen other open-source programs on Windows, as well as on my Linux partition. If I had a good Visio clone on Linux, I could dump Windows and never look back.
And yes, I've tried Dia and all the other Linux diagramming tools. Not even close.
BTW, I like Visio better when it was an independent product. Now that Microsoft owns it, it's becoming bloatware like all the rest of their products. And, of course, they killed file compatibility with earlier versions, as is their style.

Missing the point.... (2, Insightful)

Curmudgeonlyoldbloke (850482) | more than 8 years ago | (#14733735)

The point isn't that app X on Linux as "nearly as good" or "as good as" app Y on Windows, it's that, when it comes to hiring, there are people out there who know app Y but not app X.

App X has to be (a) better in some way (to get people to switch) and (b) easy to use by people familiar with app Y (to stop them giving up after 5 minutes).
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...