What is Digg?158 Comments
- inactive, on 10/26/2008, -6/+81In the end if proprietary software companies can still turn a profit after so many people pirate their software; and that software is still superior to the open source version. Then they deserve to win in that market. But given a choice most people would choose the open source, freely available version to the one they have to pirate.
GIMP will continue getting better, and maybe even one day overtake Photoshop eventually. But for right now, the superior product is in the lead, as it should be. - toastgodsupreme, on 10/27/2008, -2/+48To those who won't read the article:
Basically as we pirate software like Photoshop and Windows, we neglect things like GIMP and Linux which are already free.
But the article misses the biggest point (it barely touches on it really) in that people use the industry standard. That being Windows, Photoshop, MS Office, etc. Open source alternatives are nice, but until they become standard in more businesses, they'll just maintain their niche roles.
I use Windows over Linux because it's what I know and it's what people I know need support with. I use MS Office because I need to be able to support it. I've never had anyone ask me about Open Office before. Sorry. And that's just how it goes.
If GIMP had an easy way of mimicing Photoshop in terms of interface, I'd be pretty inclined to move to it (I've seen some guides on how to customize GIMP to make it look like Photoshop in the past, but it seemed like a lot to do, there needs to be a simple switch for it).
And that's what people need really if these open source alternatives want to gain more of a foothold. They need to feel like what people are already using. Someone needs to be able to sit down at a Linux box and be able to go "Oh, I click here to get this, yeah, this all feels familiar". I know the hardcore Linux guys will boo at this, but if the developers want a bigger market share and draw more people in to using their alternatives, it's what has to happen. - DrWarm, on 10/27/2008, -5/+45This is sort of the point of this article, if people stopped pirating Photoshop, and instead switched to another free alternative (such as the beloved GIMP) the developers of this software would be better off. This would increase the rate it improves considerably.
FOSS > Pirated Software - sloncek, on 10/27/2008, -14/+41Oh just go back in to your hole.
Photoshop makes almost all of their money from companies that use the software and so does microsoft and every other big software company. - h0ser, on 10/27/2008, -7/+30if it's good, it'll win.
- Malachai, on 10/27/2008, -12/+31This was the reason I gave up piracy. It's so frustrating to see so many people refuse to use open source alternatives ONLY because they can easily get the proprietary software for "free."
It really, really irks me when someone who pirates Photoshop complains about the GIMP interface. They really have no right to complain; they wouldn't be so afraid of the GIMP if they didn't pirate. And it's not like Photoshop offers anything better for these people. 100% of the people that refuse my offer do little more than resize pictures or add captions to their photos. - Natasevoli, on 10/27/2008, -0/+18Wingdings?
- Nephersir7, on 10/27/2008, -10/+25It feels so good to use openoffice.org on linux, and then seeing looking at somebody using ms word (pirated or not) on a vista laptop with 200$ worth of security software
- vagarach, on 10/27/2008, -0/+15What about Apache? That's open source, and it is THE industry standard!
- ahac, on 10/27/2008, -2/+16Piracy hurts competition. Open source or not... people are not interested in a competing product to the one they pirated (usually the market leader) because everyone thinks that most popular = the best (and price doesn't matter).
- strangewill, on 10/27/2008, -8/+19The only incentive for FOSS should not be that it's free. You should not look at two pieces of software and say "I lose a lot of functionality, GUI implementation ideas, and stability, but for the sake of the free software, I'll get the free software".
If you want free software to do better, you need to develop it better and make it a superior product, more people do not make developers work harder, in the end, it's still free and the developers are getting next to nothing for their work. - elementop, on 10/27/2008, -3/+14Such as...?
- rolf, on 10/27/2008, -0/+11Their notebook is probably using much more resources or has to be more powerful (read: expensive) to run equivalent software. Especially on Vista vs. a standard Linux Distro.
- senae, on 10/27/2008, -1/+11Awesome, I love it when one thing is declared the be-all and end all of technology. Makes it all the more amusing when something better comes along. there's going to come a time when photoshop will be just a name. I'm not saying that's a good thing or a bad thing, just that it's an inevitable thing.
- ha3er0, on 06/16/2009, -18/+28"GIMP will continue getting better, and maybe even one day overtake Photoshop eventually...."
Sorry. GIMP is a great piece of software and something OS community can be very proud of. But GIMP will never overtake Photoshop.
Photoshop may not be justified with its price, and it is bloated for some people, but its one hell of a software. - UnterDenLinden, on 10/27/2008, -8/+16Wait, i can't read it. All random symbols. I though it was a joke..
- dacheetah, on 10/28/2008, -0/+8I find it hilarious watching people trying to enter formulae in Office. Granted 2007 has some ability for formulae, OOo does a much better job of it in most cases. Also, graphs in Office can be a pain in the arse to customise sometimes.
- andycr512, on 10/27/2008, -0/+8Way to read the article.
- mithrasinvictus, on 10/27/2008, -0/+8A new name wouldn't hurt.
- oMeSSiaHo, on 10/27/2008, -12/+20$200 of security software?!
I feel good watching someone try to figure out how to do something in open office that takes me two mouse clicks in word. - XenoSNK, on 10/27/2008, -1/+9Oh jesus christ so many question marks!
- SuperMoses, on 10/27/2008, -0/+8RTFA
- renegadeafk, on 10/27/2008, -1/+9paint.NET would be better suited to the tasks and it has a much better UI. PS or not gimp has an awful UI.
- horsepie, on 10/27/2008, -0/+8"Use the Gimp. Just to be pimp."
Call the Gimp marketing team NOW. - inactive, on 10/27/2008, -1/+8I didn't say it would happen soon; I was more implying that I don't think Adobe's business model in the distant future. I happen to think that open source software will prevail in most markets in the end, including this one. But for the short run, Adobe will retain their virtual monopoly.
- bizkit00, on 10/27/2008, -0/+7article does not make it's argument very well. so people pirate the paid product instead of downloading the open source one? Make your open source product compete with the paid one. You can't just count on the price of the competition leading people to your cheaper alternative - you need substance.
- SpeedSteamBoat, on 10/28/2008, -0/+7So because some person out there you probably fictionalized is unfamiliar with OpenOffice.org it's a fundamentally bad piece of software? Sure. Makes perfect sense.
- Scira, on 10/27/2008, -2/+8What this article says is true, if you pirate something you are more likely to buy future products then if you had never sampled their product. So it helps diminish some of guilt of pirating, everybody wins?
- AmusedToDeath, on 10/28/2008, -0/+6I call ***** on that. If they can learn how to use linux and open source, they can quickly adapt to their windows counterparts if needed. If anything, learning how to do things like use the CLI and install software with dependencies will probably make them *more* desirable in the marketplace.
- LR2_, on 10/27/2008, -4/+10Thank you, I don't understand why this is so hard to understand for some people. Using and mastering industry standard programs exponentially increases your usefulness in the business world.
Who is going to get the job? The guy who references mastery in GIMP, OpenOffice, and Linux or the guy who references mastery in Photoshop, Word, and Windows?
Plus Photoshop and Word ARE superior to their free alternatives. - Sendai129, on 10/27/2008, -0/+6Yea I can't read it either. Can somebody out there help? I'm using FF and I've already tried changing the character encoding to a bunch of them.
Edit, just tried to open it using IE and Chrome and it works fine in both of those... I'd like to know why it isn't working in firefox :( - rolf, on 10/27/2008, -1/+6NeoOffice on Mac and OpenOffice on Vista/Ubuntu works fine for me...
- greentimes, on 10/27/2008, -3/+8It would be cool tho if there was a design firm that exclusively used the Gimp. Just to be pimp.
I like the point of this article - but i think a logical hole in it is that the software is already an industry standard and therefore THAT is exactly why people are forced to pirate it. It's not that people pirating it makes it an industry standard. But it may be a self-reinforcing cycle; so the point may remain valid that if you really want to stick it to the man then you should give them the finger by using Open Source software. - EVILTHETURTLE, on 10/28/2008, -1/+6��������}�v�H����9�Hee�.�;�E�䒷�����,WOM��)�H��Z����;�ߙ��'��7 �)��E����ʤH �Fč�/������~x���#��/O~�l�*�O�g�������^�}���U�8r'q0 ;�T^���ý���l�[�������0V�?V.8X�o���Y�ղ7��p�Ly1M��qj�nW_ׇ}�s�Q8 F~��p}���'�������n眹 ���|�^���M�NG�ŝNGA�彩Dq�����[���z�z�.|߫�m1�l���n}�����Y��Y8^�� _8�rc�D|��L���K���L�mL�=�z-���h�/OO�W���~��:�L��3}^`�'Q�q�,: ���I0���fw?�N�$*o˂I4�p)3��ʁs����K%���`�߉�Йbg@��V��t�^�U�[�8�` �6q�@Y�*��!-�'Ȁϣ���9S���`x2sN@�A�c?��ȉ���܍���v�뎂��#'����gs@w��# �>?y���EH�+E��}�ۙ�Կ
- Travelsonic, on 10/27/2008, -0/+5That isnt the source of debate here. Of course infringement of copyright is illegal.
- thetron, on 10/27/2008, -4/+9GIMP won't take photoshop unless the UI is completely overhauled and you can use it better than photoshop
Don't say "You can download the photoshop skin"
Seriously. If that dam good why wouldn't gimp make it the new default skins - smotpoker, on 10/27/2008, -2/+7What is your point? Assuming that's true (which I wouldn't, especially in Microsoft's case since they've pulled all kinds of ***** up ***** in the past to manipulate the market etc), this article is about how piracy affects FOSS, not how it affects proprietary vendors.
Many people favor Adobe and MS because they are brands they recognize and are familiar with. This familiarity often develops in school or work and doesn't reflect the quality of the software itself. Regardless of the lack of any real basis for comparison, they will proceed to recommend and favor that same software indefinitely.
If most people who didn't need PS used/recommended gimp, there would be a lot more users, feedback, support, investors, developers, etc. - ethana2, on 10/28/2008, -0/+5I DID, DANGIT, THEY WON'T LISTEN!
The Gnu Professional Image Manipulation Program
G-PIMP.
"Don't photoshop it, PIMP IT!" - domness, on 10/27/2008, -1/+6I think article really speaks some sense.
Even though I use pirated software in places, I do try to do my best with the Open Source line of things. i.e. GIMP and OOo.
And the article is working fine on my Firefox. - inactive, on 10/28/2008, -0/+5GIMPShop is not a skin. It emulates photoshop's ui almost perfectly. Most photoshop tutorials will even work in it.
GIMP is great for guys like me, non-professionals. I like to manipulate and create images. Photoshop is too much for me, and MSpaint is way too little. Nothing wrong with having a free alternative that can emulate photoshop in all the ways I need it to, and have the features MSpaint lacks, but is still very small, easy on the resources, and has millions of free brushes, tools, etc. I believe a pro would still need photoshop for now, though. - Atomic1fire, on 10/27/2008, -0/+5Free software tends to be offered for free because someone is nice enough to compile it for free, and then offer it for free.
they could offer the source for free, and then charge for the compiled version, and make money. or just charge for the software with the source included. - twiztidsinz, on 10/27/2008, -0/+4No. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gratis_versus_Libre
- jasmus, on 10/27/2008, -4/+8It feels so clunky to use openoffice on windows or mac though.
- chaoswings, on 10/27/2008, -3/+7But 2 problems remain with that:
1) Photoshop is an industry standard your shooting yourself in the foot if you don't know how to use it. There are MANY people who use photoshop to it's full potential. Look at all the podcasts and tutorials out there.
2) GIMP is an unknown. Every time I asked around for help with GIMP nobody I knew used it. I always had to go to the internet.
GIMP is nowhere near Photoshop as it stands and it never will be. That's because Photoshop has an industry driving it Open source does not, Photoshop therefore develops much faster.
A perfect example is linux and OS X. Both were derived from parts of unix. One has a strong support for drivers etc. while the other still struggles with wireless cards.
To get ahead you need to do what Mozilla did with Firefox. Give the user everything they expect from the leading software (Internet Explorer) and improve upon it and add more features. Firefox is slowly pulling ahead.
GIMP is a crippled version of photoshop. Unless it gets to the point where it can match Photoshop stride for stride it will never take. - roguedragon, on 10/27/2008, -2/+6http://www.raiden.net/?cat=2&aid=446
Here's another great article that covers this topic by discussing how piracy actually helps proprietary software immeasurably by building a user base and cementing market control through sheer numbers, legitimate or not. The only way for FOSS to truly gain more market share is if the FOSS community fights piracy as well. - AlphaBronco, on 01/25/2009, -1/+5I've pondered this issue for quite some time as an IT professional working with small businesses. For ethical reasons I will not install unlicensed proprietary software, but am happy to recommend and install the FLOSS alternative(s) if there are any.
The proprietary software licensing headaches alone are enough to drive me towards exclusively FLOSS environments. - JakeW, on 10/28/2008, -0/+4In an earlier article we established that piracy of software is basically a given in today’s world where information is so easily shared and duplicated. We also established that no matter what DRM measures are implemented by commercial software developers, no matter how advanced or how draconian they are, someone’s always going to find a way around it. With that in mind, perhaps, if we’re able to figure that out, surely so are they…?
Epic Edits Weblog, through their own original research, discovered that very nearly 60% of their poll participants were using a pirated version of Adobe Photoshop. That’s a good deal more than half of them, which means more than half the copies of the program among that sample are illegitimate ones that didn’t come from Adobe themselves.
Indeed, I’ve installed Windows copies on many peoples’ computers, with the CDs they themselves have provided me. I have yet to see one that came from a boxed, retail copy of Windows. While it’s a point that gets often awkwardly tossed aside in discussions among IT folk, it’s true; widespread software piracy isn’t just some peculiar phenomenon trickling into our society, it’s the norm.
I’m willing to bet a good few of those reading this blog are using pirated software, and, until I switched to Linux last year, I myself was quite content to be one of those few. After all, who’s going to keep tabs on you closely enough to send the police kicking down your front door because you’ve got Deluge downloading Office 2007? But, when you hop on your favorite torrent site and then have yourself a copy of Adobe’s entire creative suite within the hour, you may not be aware of all the implications that using pirated software could have in the software development community.
Pirates Still Support The Developers
It seems a somewhat common attitude I’ve seen among people; they’ve got an axe to grind with the bigwigs like Adobe or Microsoft, and then thus choose to pirate their software as their quiet little way of ’sticking it to the man’. It’s easy to understand that mindset; if you download the program illegally instead of paying the company for the right to use it, they’ve lost your purchase there – these rich corporations are charging hundreds for a program that’s hardly worth a fraction of that price, so if you pirate, they’re just getting what they deserve! (Gleeful cackle)
Stick it to the man!
Microsoft chairman Bill Gates, in response to the massive degree of piracy in China of their Windows operating system, has been quoted as saying that “while it was terrible that people in China pirated so much software, if they were going to pirate anybody’s software he’d certainly prefer it be Microsoft’s.”
And it’s interesting to think of the fallout from this. A commercial software company would certainly prefer that you pirate a version of their software, rather than avoiding it altogether. While they’re making less money, they still have your support in using it, and that often leads to more revenue for them down the line.
Adobe’s products are a good example, especially their Photoshop program. If you look in a newspaper for job advertisements in the field of graphic design, illustrations, logos, or anything of the like, you’re likely to have seen that an employee must be familiar with Adobe Photoshop and/or Illustrator. When I was a student of TAFE in Australia, the programs we were using were Adobe programs, and with good reason; Adobe Photoshop, Dreamweaver, Flash… these are all industry standard programs. So even if something better becomes available, people will still be using Adobe, because it’s the industry’s standard. Most of my student friends were using pirated versions of Photoshop at home because they couldn’t afford the real thing, and because it was what they were learning to use in class. I showed a few of them the benefits of using GIMP instead, and the response was total rejection of GIMP. It was unfamiliar, it had no perceived benefits over Photoshop, and most of all, it wasn’t even any cheaper than a pirated version of Photoshop.
It makes sense, that if they’re going to continue with their careers and don’t want to land themselves in hot water for using illegitimate copies for their own commercial endeavors, they’re eventually going to shell out that $800 for it, as a few of these friends of mine have already ended up doing.
The lesson is, that even if you haven’t yet paid for the use of the software, the company may well have already sold it to you anyway. You contribute to upholding the industry standard, and then you’re halfway to doing Adobe’s promotion for them.
Microsoft Windows hold 90% of the desktop market, and for much the same reason. It’s what most people are used to, and that goes a long way to securing many more sales of Windows for more and more prospective computer users. Microsoft don’t desire losing money through piracy, but in the long run, they more than make up for it by having their product supported by pirates and legitimate users alike as a product that’s accepted by the mainstream market.
Who’s Losing?
We’ve all heard plenty of spiel from software companies lamenting the disadvantages of using pirated software, but often while they come up with valid points, they’re often only points that are in their interests. Adobe moans that covering for pirated software hurts the global economy, leading to losses of jobs, legitimate users where money that could’ve gone into R&D instead goes into simply keeping the company afloat, and finally users of pirated software due to often (sic) defective or virus-laden copies circulating on the net.
While the validity of that last point there is certainly up for grabs, there’s other, less documented implications that are especially relevant for proponents of Free and Open Source Software.
Firstly, legitimate users are certainly losing out; prices raised up due to piracy (or using piracy as an excuse, as the case may be) leads to legitimate customers paying more to use the product; effectively meaning that they’re paying for pirates to use the software without paying a dime.
How FOSS Is Feeling It
But there’s also going to be an often unseen impact on FOSS developers; FOSS isn’t about generating revenue, but public interest and user support is the FOSS community’s lifeblood; if you choose to download a copy of MS Office 2007 instead of OpenOffice.org, OOo’s developers have lost a user, lost a supporter and possibly, lost a contributor. Louis Suarez-Potts, community manager for OpenOffice.org, has said as much himself.
Customer support is a goal that both free and corporate developers have in common. A customer that chooses to use Kompozer over Dreamweaver, is a score for the open source community that now has a supporter, and a loss for Adobe, who’ve lost a potential profit.
Even the spread of trial or ’stripped-down’ versions of commercial software will be making an impact on the FOSS movement; if you’re using Photoshop elements, you’re still doing Adobe’s word-of-mouth marketing for them, and then potentially drawing in more customers for them, while free alternatives are never even explored. If too much of the userbase goes to a single company, that gives them an opportunity to put a stranglehold on the industry.
A good example of this is Adobe Flash; as of right now Flash remains a closed format, and the only way you can competently develop Flash at the moment is with Adobe’s software. Basically, Adobe has established a monopoly here, and there are almost no alternatives at all (besides, perhaps, OpenLaszlo, in a very limited kind of way). If you develop with Adobe Flash, whether it’s paid or pirated, you’re going to be supporting Adobe and tightening their hold on this standard in the industry.
The lesson to be learned here is that any proponent of free software shouldn’t have any interest in using pirated software; if the best choice for you is to pay for the real thing, then so be it; but if one’s really interested in ’sticking it to the man’, or at the very least doing your part to promote the virtues of free software, then the best way to do it is to hit them where it hurts; not just the hip pocket, but their mainstream credibility. If that credibility goes instead to open source developers, that puts them in a position to make something that outshines the competition for everyone. And then, no one’s going to have to pay for it.
If one can make it known to all that the support of these industry giants isn’t needed, that’s when some real difference can be made. - hamobu, on 10/27/2008, -3/+7Piracy is the wrong word. Using the word like piracy is to imply that downloading photoshop is morally wrong beyond the fact that you are breaking the law. What you are doing is copyright infringement and it is not piracy. Copyright is a limited power of monopoly given by the government to the content creators to promote creation of the content. The reason for copyright is to benefit society, and not to recognize some god given right of content providers. By infringing on copyright, you are not hurting anyone. By downloading Photoshop for free, the state of Adobe corp is exactly the same after your action as before. Adobe corp might not make any money off of you, but they do not have claims to the money they would have earned in the future, only to the money in their possession already.
- theOster, on 10/27/2008, -3/+6LOL!!!
(sorry)
and before i'm buried, it was a reference to those people that add captions with Photoshop - SpeedSteamBoat, on 10/28/2008, -1/+4I guess if you are suckered into glass themed menus OOo might seem "clunky", but, as far as I can tell, I can write my paper just as well without all the bloat and useless "functionality" of Office07.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 161 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is