Comments on: Total Photoshop Killer: Pixelmator!

By: Rafael Nascimento Sampaio

Rafael Nascimento Sampaio — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 19:13:10 +0000

For publish professionals, this software isn’t ideal, but for web designers, that need crop some images, retouch some photos, and create some layouts, or even open psd files this is very handle.

By: jr

jr — Tue, 27 Nov 2007 10:40:34 +0000

> Professionals in publishing and design won’t use this. This is a toy. Hell, if GIMP can’t support CMYK, this eye-candy thing won’t either.

What about professionals in WEB-design? You don’t really need CMYK there. I think this could be a cool tool. I just would like it if it had all the effects and plug-in-ability.

By: Brendon Carr (Korea Law Blog)

Brendon Carr (Korea Law Blog) — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 06:55:29 +0000

As for me, I bought Pixelmator. Scouring the torrent sites seems like a recommendation to pirate a copy.

By: Erock

Erock — Fri, 28 Sep 2007 13:04:46 +0000

Professionals in publishing and design won’t use this. This is a toy. Hell, if GIMP can’t support CMYK, this eye-candy thing won’t either.

By: plugsnpixels

plugsnpixels — Wed, 19 Sep 2007 07:22:47 +0000

Friends, when you buy a current Mac you also get a PC! Run OS-X, Windows, Linux, all at once! Surely that’s a better deal than investing in hardware that is stuck running one OS! And it’s way easier to migrate a virtual OS to another machine (drag and drop copy) than it is to reinstall Windows… So there’s no reason to choose one OS over another–run ‘em all!

By: Colin

Colin — Fri, 24 Aug 2007 00:00:19 +0000

@Steve. Why do you insist on calling my Mac overpriced? Identical hardware and comparable software from dell would cost me nearly $400 more than my MacBook. I stand by Apple and their decision not to offer poor quality hardware low end hardware. If you want to get a $400 computer get one. Just remember, you get what you pay for. That being said, I won’t even spend $400 on a Windows computer. I spend a minimum of $900 for hardware when I build my game machines.

By: Lorenz Sell

Lorenz Sell — Sun, 19 Aug 2007 04:08:52 +0000

Steve,

Honestly, it’s because of the interface. I was a life long Windows user up until last November. Today, I almost resent MS for putting me through so many years of hell. You might ask why there aren’t more people saying “another reason to get a winblows box.” There reason is that no one is happy with their Windows experience.

Yes, Macs are overpriced and don’t have nearly the software support. But Macs offer simply the best computing experience on the Market. Once you get used to using a Mac, nothing else compares because everything works and they are so well thought out.

Every time I am forced to use a Windows machine I cringe. Without fail, I have to click on at least 5 confirmation and notification boxes. I have to wait for ever for apps to load. And something always invariably crashes. I never have problems like that on the Mac.

By: steve jabs

steve jabs — Sat, 18 Aug 2007 16:42:11 +0000

@Bill

Because I have to read the same anonymous comment on half of the sites I go to and the stupidity of them still amazes me.

By: David Mackey

David Mackey — Sat, 18 Aug 2007 16:40:55 +0000

I like Paint.NET – though it isn’t for Mac OS, but that’s okay since I’m a Windows guy.

By: Bill You

Bill You — Sat, 18 Aug 2007 14:16:13 +0000

@Steve Jabs .. Question for you is why the hell do you give a damn about an anonymous comment.

By: steve jabs

steve jabs — Sat, 18 Aug 2007 06:56:49 +0000

@Jill

When will people stop it with the “another great reason to get a mac” comments. Why must you constantly defend reasons to get a mac? Do macs suck that bad that you have to find a random blog entry about a beta program and go,

“SEEEEEE!!! BUY A MAC!!! ONLY MACS CAN USE THIS ONE OF A KIND IMAGE EDITING SOFTWARE!!! IT’S NOT EVEN OUT YET?!!!!2212!!@!1!”

Let’s face it. In the world of doing most common day shit….Mac’s blow a huge load. Mac’s are great for things like video editing…until a version a Final Cut something comes out for PC. And that day inches closer with the support of OS X on PCs.

Hardware wise, software wise, and functionality wise PCs own both the Mac and Linux world. Maybe not linux when it comes to servers and management. But that is the same thing when it comes to Macs and video editing as well.

Sure, the PC isn’t great when it comes to a lot of things. It isn’t highly secure as much as they should be. Windows is pretty much uselessly expensive when you don’t get OEM. And some things are highly irritating.

I suppose my question to you is why? Why do you make comments like that? Why exactly is your overpriced computer any better than my PC? Is it because it looks artsy, and like, it’s totally a low market share, so I’m like totally cool to be a part of that?

This comment is pretty much useless, because even if every overbearing Mac user read it they would still be too cool to care.

By: Gizmo Central

Gizmo Central — Sat, 18 Aug 2007 02:07:11 +0000

I wholeheartedly welcome a Paint.net equivalent on OS X. I have yet to find anything free and comparable, and I sure as hell cannot justify $800 or whatever Adobe wants for Photoshop just to crop and watermark pics.

Sadly, I doubt that this Pixelmator will be free, so it won’t truly be equivalent to Paint.net.

By: Jill

Jill — Fri, 17 Aug 2007 23:16:48 +0000

Another reason to get a mac……….

By: Jeff B

Jeff B — Fri, 17 Aug 2007 22:53:48 +0000

No Vista compatibility, no thanks…

By: T

Fri, 17 Aug 2007 22:41:37 +0000

Must everything new be called a ______-killer? It’s more likely that this will compete with less advanced editing programs, such as Paint.NET. The only Photoshop users that this will capture are the ones that illegally download Photoshop when they don’t really need it. They are the ones who will be dazzled by the pretty interface, and I’ll bet it’ll suit their needs just fine (like adding text to images for avatars/signature or simple photo editing). However, things like RAW support are missing, and I didn’t see how well they would do colorspaces, but I assume that it will not even beat the GIMP’s limited colorspace handling. I’ll stick with the GIMP (well, I have to, seeing as I don’t have a Mac, but I would stick with it even if I did).