Talk:GIMPshop

message: This distro is nitorious for bugs, we should point this out.--68.126.252.7 02:04, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Bugginess is subjective.  IMO, a mention as to GIMPshop's bugginess should only be added if a reference to it can be found in a notable source. --Irrevenant [ talk ] 11:00, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Bug Section

message: Does anyone know whether GIMPshop's GUI redevelopment will ever make its way into actual GIMP or will just exist as a separate project? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.231.130.76 (talk • contribs) 00:50, 4 December 2005
The short answers is no.  GIMP might adopt a few of the changes incidentally but the developers seem to like things the way they are.  My understanding was GIMPShop was hacked up as an experiment in the hope the GIMP would adopt it, rather than with any intention of starting a seperate project.  (As far as I know you aren't supposed to use talk pages for these sorts of question though.) Horkana
:That's a real shame. GIMPshop makes GIMP usable. Is there a GIMPshop community that should or could be linked to from this article? This is such a huge improvement over GIMP, I am sure there is an active, thriving user community for it out there somewhere. --148.128.243.8 17:29, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Direction of GIMPshop

message: The help files for Gimpshop are not included with the latest install.  Does anyone know wehre I can get these?
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Mkline (talk • contribs) 22:11, 2007 January 4 (UTC)
His homepage has a (tiny) bio.  I also found two interviews with him (G4 interview.  OSDir.com interview). Bowmanjj 18:21, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Help

message: I changed the link for the Solaris download.  The previous link to here led to a page where you had to type "GIMPshop" into the search box, and then that took you to the page where you could download GIMPshop.  this link is much more direct ~ Anya Prynn 05:07, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Solaris download

message: What is the official Gimpshop website? 
gimpshop.com is listed as "website" in the overview? And gimpshopdotnet.blogspot.com is listed as the official site.
From Gimpshop dot net: "I am not Scott Moschella, creator of GIMPShop, nor have I done anything related to the making of GIMPShop.."
What about plasticbugs.com which is Scott Moschellas site about Gimpshop. Is this the offical site? It dosent link to any neither Gimpshop dot net or gimpshop.com. Tl-lomas 19:42, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Gimpshop.com is not the official site. There is no more official site, since the software is currently on hold (or, more likely, abandonware at this point). Just to reiterate the contents of the link below: Scott Moschella and GIMPshop are not associated with gimpshop.com. In fact, as per Moschella's words, gimpshop.com is "a shady, profiteering copy-cat website taking credit". The MetaFilter link shows Moschella (using the username plasticbugs) asking for legal ways of "taking the Gimpshop.com domain or preventing this guy from profiting from my name and work".Wrathkind (talk) 15:58, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Official Gimpshop site?

message: Would someone confirm whether or not this version is a legitimate update to GIMPshop? I'm not someone who can read the underlying code, but I'm thinking this isn't even GIMPshop at all. I think this is simply GIMP 2.6.11 for Windows (taken from Sourceforge), but wrapped up in an InstallIQ software that attempts to install extraneous and superfluous programs alongside "GIMPshop" (as noted in the last paragraph of this review).
I can't find any changelog for this "update", nor can I find out any information on who released it. I think this is actually a form of malware that tricks people into thinking this is GIMPshop when it actually isn't. The InstallIQ installer is likely designed to install extra programs for profit/promotion/or other more malicious reasons. Would someone please confirm? Thanks! — Wrathkind (talk) 11:23, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  GIMPshop 2.6.11 for Windows 

message: Why actually do we keep this as a separate article? As GIMPshop is long dead and misused by someone, I suggest to merge this with the actual GIMP article. --Narayan (talk) 17:51, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: GimPhoto has taken up the mantle, think it might be better to merge with that or change this article so it leads readers to there. -- 109.76.152.79 (talk) 16:15, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  Are GIMPshop and GimPhoto related in any way other than what they attempt to achieve?  If they aren't related would it be more appropriate to list it in the See Also section? --Gnepets (talk) 09:45, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

text: Hi Naryan.  I'm Agreed.  I posted a longer reply in the GIMP article.  The only condition of merger I would propose is that a lot of content would need to be removed from the article as it isn't particularly relevant anymore  (it could be done after merge, to make the process easier). --Gnepets (talk) 09:45, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  merge? 

message: This may or may not be of interest to this article's contributors:
I originally created Gimpshop, but I'm not the jerk who owns that domain and add... (posted March 27, 2014) 75.28.104.84 (talk) 02:00, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: copy of link at the web archive, just in case. -- 109.76.152.79 (talk) 16:15, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: couldn't you change the name and buy your own domain?AndyPKU (talk) 05:44, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  2014 Ycombinator post 

message: Photoshop has been the number One in  photo editing for decades. Gimp has always been the alternative that could never push Photoshop from it's throne, despite being free of charge. However, potentially Gimp should be able to knock Photoshop of it's throne. But there are three reason is never has. Those reasons are: "interface", "interface" and "interface".
Most people in the industry are used to the Photoshop interface and those who want to get into the industry need to learn the Photoshop interface (By this power alone Adobe has always been able to refuse porting Photoshop to the Linux environment and maintain it's steep pricing).
Than one day in 2006 Gimpshop emerged. Scott Moschella created a Gimp version with Photoshop look and feel. It blew us all right out off the water. Downloads of Gimpshop really skyrocketed, thus proving the viability and deer need for a product like this. A product that not only can knock Photoshop off it's throne, but that could get rid off Photoshop alltogether.
It was the turning point of a possible total triumph for the free software movement. Using the interface of leading propriatory software opened up new horizons for other free software. However, than some greedy bastard nicked the gimpshop.com url, and used it to make money on Scott's achievement. This frustrated Scott so much that he stopped updating Gimpshop for later Gimp releases. A beautiful flower was broken. You would think the Gimp society would have picked up on this, however it never happened. Million's of people are still waiting for the miracle to happen again. Will it....
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.216.11.121 (talk) 14:25, 2015 July 27 (UTC)
"Million's of people are still waiting for the miracle to happen again." CallMeSalticidae (talk) 04:42, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Asking for a Miracle 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on GIMPshop. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150506232824/http://tml.pp.fi/gimp/pspi.html to http://tml.pp.fi/gimp/pspi.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:27, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on GIMPshop. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090216053600/http://plasticbugs.com:80/?p=241 to http://plasticbugs.com/?p=241
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20100212051421/http://www.strayprocess.com:80/blog/gimpshop-snow-leopard to http://www.strayprocess.com/blog/gimpshop-snow-leopard
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:01, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello,
According to [1], the first version was delivered in March 2005.
According to [2], the latest version (2.2.11) was delivered in December 2011.
It would be great to indicate those dates in the GIMPshop page, as well as Comparison of raster graphics editors.
Before doing it, I'd appreciate if some of you could confirm that the dates I found are correct.
Thanks,
JeromeJerome (talk) 08:38, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Project dates 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on GIMPshop. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090125202414/http://osdir.com/Article7278.phtml to http://www.osdir.com/Article7278.phtml
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://tml.pp.fi/gimp/pspi.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:32, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified