From: ray on
On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 17:57:56 -0500, J. Clarke wrote:

> On 2/23/2010 5:00 PM, ray wrote:
>> On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 16:45:42 -0500, nospam wrote:
>>
>>> In article<7uj0d4Fb4lU11(a)mid.individual.net>, ray<ray(a)zianet.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Great - I'll remember that what you say doesn't mean what you say.
>>>
>>> and i'll remember that you don't understand english.
>>
>> I understand quite well, and I generally expect people to say what they
>> mean.
>
> If you don't grasp idiomatic usage then either you don't understand
> English as well as you think you do or you have something wrong with
> you.

Ah, I see you don't expect folks to say what they mean either. I idiot
had said the PS has more support than GIMP, I would not have argued. When
he SAID GIMP had none - he was wrong.

From: nospam on
In article <7ujcunFb4lU14(a)mid.individual.net>, ray <ray(a)zianet.com>
wrote:

> Nonsense. I've not done that at all. I've suggested to a neophyte that he
> check out the free alternatives before blowing a wad of money. GIMP and
> ufraw may or may not meet his needs better than PS - they would certainly
> be cheaper and it's his decision to make.

what wad of money? photoshop elements has a free trial, and it's around
$50 if he likes it.

and from the sounds of what he described, lightroom or aperture might
be a better choice.
From: John McWilliams on
John A. wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 23:12:16 +0100, Robert Spanjaard
> <spamtrap(a)arumes.com> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 16:32:21 -0500, John A. wrote:
>>
>>>> Doesn't Windows have some kind of escape character to use spaces (and
>>>> other special characters) in filenames?
>>> Not that I can see.
>> What happens when you put double quotes around the executable?
>> Something like this:
>>
>> "C:\Program Files\DigiKam\DigiKam.exe" [filename]
>
> Yeah, that's the "quote trick" I mentioned before.
>
>> That's the only other solution I can think of. If that doesn't work, you
>> can still switch to a KDE-based Linux distro. :-)
>
> Nah. Too much other stuff to replace if I did that. :)
>
> Maybe some day. I'd love to get our business computers switched so we
> can break out of the Windows continuum. 2000's getting a little long
> in the tooth and everything since is unappetizing.

That's easy enough to do, but it takes more money.

--
john mcwilliams
From: J. Clarke on
On 2/23/2010 8:18 PM, ray wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 17:57:56 -0500, J. Clarke wrote:
>
>> On 2/23/2010 5:00 PM, ray wrote:
>>> On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 16:45:42 -0500, nospam wrote:
>>>
>>>> In article<7uj0d4Fb4lU11(a)mid.individual.net>, ray<ray(a)zianet.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Great - I'll remember that what you say doesn't mean what you say.
>>>>
>>>> and i'll remember that you don't understand english.
>>>
>>> I understand quite well, and I generally expect people to say what they
>>> mean.
>>
>> If you don't grasp idiomatic usage then either you don't understand
>> English as well as you think you do or you have something wrong with
>> you.
>
> Ah, I see you don't expect folks to say what they mean either. I idiot
> had said the PS has more support than GIMP, I would not have argued. When
> he SAID GIMP had none - he was wrong.

Can you say "Asperger's syndrome"?


From: ray on
On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 20:33:51 -0500, nospam wrote:

> In article <7ujcunFb4lU14(a)mid.individual.net>, ray <ray(a)zianet.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Nonsense. I've not done that at all. I've suggested to a neophyte that
>> he check out the free alternatives before blowing a wad of money. GIMP
>> and ufraw may or may not meet his needs better than PS - they would
>> certainly be cheaper and it's his decision to make.
>
> what wad of money? photoshop elements has a free trial, and it's around
> $50 if he likes it.

Great. What's even better than "$50 if he likes it"? How about FREE if he
likes it.


>
> and from the sounds of what he described, lightroom or aperture might be
> a better choice.