• Boomer Humor Doomergod@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    If pirating Photoshop counts as a lost sale then so does downloading GIMP.

    If so, this man is one of the greatest software pirates ever.

    • ThePyroPython@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 day ago

      Yeah nope, if the same product is available for free then the only way to prove a “stolen sale” is if someone had previously paid for the subscription and then cancelled to use the free version of the same product.

      Anything else is just the hand of the free market doing it’s thing. If Adobe executives are malding because someone made a cheaper (or free) alternative then they have two honourable routes available:

      1. Add more value to their products to convince people their price tag is worth it.

      2. Reduce the price they charge.

      But they’ll literally do anything else but those two, including astroturfing messages like “open source software is piracy”, so stop spewing corpo bullshit!

    • Johnnyvibrant@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      1 day ago

      Adobe pretty much encouraged piracy up until about a decade ago, that way they got schools to train (for free) potential future customers in their way to use design software.

      TBH I don’t understand why they have gone with the subs model they currently have, its kind of cutting the blood line from their future customers.

      Competition is always a good thing, FOSS competition is the best thing in my opinion.

      This guy is a hero, but not because he is trying to fuck Adobe but rather he is helping free design software from (massive) cost which most people cannot afford.

      More designers, better art to my mind.

      • dantheclamman@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        24 hours ago

        The subs model ensures regular and predicable quarterly revenue, which means easier forecasting of growth, which means happier shareholders.

        • JackbyDev@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          16 hours ago

          I think JetBrains’s approach is nice. You can subscribe monthly but anything you e subscribed to for 12 months you get a perpetual fall back license for. Unless I’m missing something specific it’s a win for everyone.

      • ohulancutash@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        24 hours ago

        I’d suspect it was much the same reason as why Apple decided to kill FCP and rebrand iMovie instead. Professional users are inordinately more expensive in tech support costs

        • Zagorath@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 hours ago

          But FCP X is amazing. It’s the one thing I really miss having a Mac for and it’s so disappointing that nobody else has even attempted to replicate it. It’s leaps and bounds ahead of everybody else. Calling it a “rebranded iMovie” shows either a complete lack of awareness of literally anything about it, or an incredible intellectual dishonesty that doesn’t even seen to serve a practical purpose.

          It’s also…not subscription based. Or wasn’t in 2018 when I last had a Mac.

      • zr0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        24 hours ago

        There are student subs, which are super cheap. Wouldn’t be surprised if schools/universities would get free licenses. After all, this is how they can attract new paying customers, as you correctly stated

    • BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      24 hours ago

      I guarantee that Adobe definitely sees every download of GIMP as a lost sale. That’s corporate mentality.

      I worked for many years in the music business, starting back in the days of the “Home Taping is killing music” campaign. I know for a fact that music executives saw the sale of every blank tape, and later, every download, as a lost sale. You could explain that it wasn’t really a lost sale, because that consumer probably wouldn’t have bought it anyway, but they didn’t like hearing that. If someone was listening to it, even if it was just curiosity, that was a lost sale.

      They didn’t feel that way about radio stations or libraries, two places where people could get music for free, but somehow, borrowing a friend’s album, and taping it so you could listen to it a few times and decide if you wanted to buy a clean copy, infuriated them.

      I knew the people at the top who were going after the downloaders. They were mean, nasty, greedy people, who were stealing way more from their own artists than consumers were ever stealing from them, so I never had a single concern about downloading whatever I want.

      These days, artists hardly make any money from recordings. Unless you are buying the music direct from the artist at their shows, then you are just feeding an evil record company. Pirate the records, pay for the shows and merch, and if you want to own a physical copy, buy your music direct from the artist.

      Do that long enough, and record companies will die.

      • moopet@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        11 hours ago

        And for a while, people using tapes to make field recordings were supposed to pay more for the blanks to offset the supposed lost sales of the unrelated music industry.

        • BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          8 hours ago

          The record industry wanted a special tax on blank cassettes, to offset the costs of home recording, which they would distribute as they saw fit, but they never got it.

          If there had been a tax, it would have gone straight into the exec’s pockets, and no artist would have ever seen a dime.

  • baatliwala@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    50
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    17 hours ago

    Man ain’t nobody lost money because of Gimp. Flawed argument aside, at least Blender could be in for a shout

  • TrackinDaKraken@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    22 hours ago

    I used Photoshop professionally for nearly 30 years. I retired and don’t need it anymore, so now I use GIMP on Linux for the few personal projects I want to make.

    GIMP’s interface leaves a lot to be desired. One example, in Photoshop the Channels tab shows all the channels and includes any masks you make, they look and work similarly to the layers, and it’s intuitive–when you learn one, you know the other. GIMP doesn’t work that way, in fact I’ve yet to make sense of the channels.

    Also, typically one would expect filters to only be applied to a selected layer and even to a selection within that layer. Some GIMP filters apply to the whole image, flattening my layers, and creating new ones. Fortunately, these are made in a new document, so you don’t lose anything, but the filter cannot be applied to a partial image, you’d need to pull the result back into your original image and mask out the part you wanted. Very strange.

    I could go on about how selecting works and doesn’t work, but I won’t.

    No, Adobe has not “lost millions” due to GIMP, they haven’t lost a cent. People who use GIMP were either never going to pay Adobe a cent, or already have and are using GIMP now, for similar reasons to my own. Virtually no one uses GIMP professionally at any volume of interest to Adobe.

    It’s a good and useful tool, but it’s severely lacking compared to Photoshop.

    • enthusiasm_headquarters@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Maybe you mean a more “brush and canvas” interface without complexity and distraction. I’m an artist that uses gimp. They are both great, Krita is just made with ease of use and emulation of irl tools in mind. GIMP can do emulation stuff too, but it can also do tons of other things, even video fx and animation.

  • Agent641@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    65
    ·
    22 hours ago

    This is like movie companies saying that me pirating a movie cost them money.

    Absence of a free thing isn’t going to magic some money into my wallet with which to buy your thing, I’m still broke AF.

  • flemtone@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    13 hours ago

    I know quite a few professionals that use GIMP and Inkscape just so they arent locked into the adobe ecosystem and monthly/yearly fees.

  • foodandart@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    1 day ago

    Annnd well they should lose millions!

    NGL, I paid out the ass for PSCS3 waay back in 2007 - Universal binary… PPC AND Intel installer - and FWIW, I’m still using it. In point of fact it’s why all my Macs are dual boot with Mojave (32-bit support) so I can continue to install and use it. Homegirl is no how, no way gonna rent what I should be able to own.

    (As Adobe no longer has the CS3 activation servers online, if you’ve still got an installed, activated, instance of the PSCS3 kicking around somewhere, copy the actual application itself out to a backup location… so when you use the installer in a system capable of running it, you can swap the newly installed, inactivated copy out for the activated one you have in backup. Just do NOT try and launch the program before you do the swap… This works for PC copies of CS3 as well as Mac…)

    • ZkhqrD5o@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 day ago

      Personally, I can recommend a VM for that reason. Activate it once and then just copy the VM over to a new PC, Backup location, etc. Turn on internet access for it when activating, turn it off and leave it disabled for the rest of your life. Worked like a charm for me.

    • ChunkMcHorkle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      23 hours ago

      Yep, same here. Mojave on an old MacBook with a complete CS5 suite lets me continue to use what I paid for.

      I didn’t have a still-running copy like you did, so instead I disabled all network access and used my existing install media/licensing to activate offline, then before restoring network I went through and blocked every single executable at the firewall, esp anything having to do with updates or the licensing module. Now it doesn’t matter whether there is internet access or not, everything is stable and it doesn’t phone home.

      The blocking was a pain in the ass, no lie, but I can restore the firewall settings from time machine if ever needed, and meanwhile I have a working, unshittified CS5 that is not constantly trying to move my data up to the cloud or give itself legal rights to my IP. It’s lacking some newer features probably, but it does what I need.

      I’m going to pass your instructions along to a friend still using CS5 on the same Mac he installed it on, though. It’s a great strategy.

      • foodandart@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        18 hours ago

        It’s a great strategy.

        IIRC, I discovered it when I retired my Mirror Door Drive G4 and bought a MacPro. At the time I wasn’t online and couldn’t get the fresh install to activate and on a lark, because it WAS a universal binary, I just copied over the application from the G4.

        It worked, but was a bit janky, so once the internet got sorted, I did a clean reinstall of CS3 and activated it as normal… I still have the G4 with the CS3 on it, and also copies of the install I did on the MacPro.

        Also, with the CS3 and the OSes later than El Capitan, you need to get the JavaForOSX.dmg from Apple. It won’t launch otherwise.

        The great thing about CS3 is that even if I try to have it update, it doesn’t. I used to run it with all the Adobe “phone home” addresses blocked in my system’s hosts file. Now I no longer have to even do that. Nothing’s there online. It will launch Bridge but when it gets to the Adobe Stock Photos and accepts the certificate, it connects to their servers and promptly quits.

        LOL! Too funny!

        Adobe has moved on and it’s pure bliss for me.

    • imrighthere@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 day ago

      I’m still using cs3 as well. For what it’s worth, I just checked and it’s still out there to be had. I have the master suite, which I could not find, but pscs3 itself is still alive out there.

      • foodandart@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        23 hours ago

        Which is good!

        Years back, I tried the trial version of CS6 and just about lost my mind when it came to finding where tools had been hidden in the submenus… but the biggest “oh hell no…” was whatever they had done to the print profiles. No matter what setting or profile I used, the images were oversaturated. Even tried importing from CS3 - nope. I gave it up pretty quickly at that point.

  • NιƙƙιDιɱҽʂ@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    18 hours ago

    Switched to GIMP from Photoshop probably 15 years ago. Adobe didn’t lose any money, however, I’ve always pirated from those greedy fucks.

  • SnarkoPolo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    16 hours ago

    Before I retired last year, I was web developer for a community college. We had a graphic artist, but frequently I needed to just do a quick resize or change format for a web image. GIMP got the job done without the resource gluttony of PS.

  • merc@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    3 hours ago

    What many people don’t think about is that open source / free software is anti-billionaire software.

    Since all software is bits, and it’s free and easy to copy bits, to make money from software, a company needs to build a “moat”. A moat is something that protects your company from people choosing alternatives. Open source software is built without a moat, so that anybody and everybody can access it. And, if you build with the GPL anybody who builds something based on your software is forbidden from building a moat of their own.

    This means that it’s really hard to get rich building free / open source software. But, it also means that in any area where there is free / open source software it’s much harder for fully commercial, closed source, for profit companies to make big profits. Enshittify too much and people will just switch to the alternative, even if the alternative is significantly less stable, not as easy to use, is lacking features, etc. Piss people off too much and they might actually invest engineering money on improving the open source alternative.

    Adobe is a big company with their fingers in many different pies. Photoshop is only one of their products. Gimp alone can’t do much to hold Adobe back, but it does limit what they can do with Photoshop and still expect to make money from it.

    • Gates9@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Software licensing will eventually be relegated to the “dustbin of history”, hopefully it won’t be after humanity emerges from a post-apocalyptic hellscape.

      • merc@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Yeah. Software licensing is artificial scarcity, trying to make the new world of bits seem like the old world of objects so that people who knew how to make money with objects can still make money with bits.

        • ricecake@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          34 minutes ago

          I agree that it’s artificial scarcity, but I don’t think the conversation is going to fully be able to move to removing that scarcity until we find a way to handle the people who rearrange the bits actually living in a world of objects and totally authentic scarcity.

          It’s the same dilemma we have with authors and musicians. Even if it can be infinitely copied the people who make it still need to eat, and not just be able to find a way to eat, but to reliably and predictably eat which makes donations and crowd funding iffy at best.

          As a user and contributer to open source, I’m loath to put up any defense of something that irritates me more often than not. As a person who makes a living working on the closed side I can honestly say I would probably not be in the field if there wasn’t as much ability to make a living in it.

          Software patents can fuck off though.

  • Zephorah@discuss.online
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    23 hours ago

    I wish this were all true. I love having GIMP, and Sumatra for that matter, but let’s not pretend that Adobe product doesn’t have greater advantages.

    Keep up the good work surrounding free and open source, but let’s remain real about it.