«

Bill Funk wrote:
>
> On 06 Feb 2007 00:08:16 EST, John Turco <> wrote:
>
> >Bill Funk wrote:
> >
> ><edited, for brevity>
> >
> >> >Several months ago, I obtained GIMPshop. I found it rather difficult
> >> >to use, despite your claims about GIMP, above; Paint Shop Pro, for
> >> >example, is infinitely more intuitive.
> >>
> >> It is if you're already familiar with an earlier version.
> >> Put someone with no photo editing experience in front of either Gimp
> >> or PSP, and watch the results. Neither is "intuitive."
> >> PSP's various parts are better integrated, though.
> >
> >
> >Hello, Bill:
> >
> >What you (and other respondents) have said, may be true. Regardless, I
> >still think that PSP's better "parts integration" gives it a distinct
> >advantage, over its rivals. It was fairly easy for me to master its
> >basic functions (quite unlike GIMPshop, itself).
> >
> >
> >Cordially,
> > John Turco <>
>
> Yes, I really like the integration.
> But being integrated and being intuitive are two very different
> things.

Hello, Bill:

Well, GIMPshop has neither of those things going for it, I believe.

> We might think using a mouse is intuitive, but when our daughter was
> in grade school, her school had Apples, without mice.

Her school was "without mice," eh? So, what >did< it have -- rats? <G>

> When she went to use my PC for a homework assignment, she wanted to
> use the mouse. I explained that movingt he mouse would move the curser
> onscreen.
> She picked the mouse up, and waved it around.
> Not intuitive at all.

A hearty "d-CON dinner" would've taken care of that uncooperative
rodent, I can assure you.


Cordially,
John Turco <>