Metanet Forums

Are there any differences when using Chrome? Because it seems to be fine for Firefox. It seems quite nice, I already like it better than the new MS Paint for Windows 7, which I abhor simply because the pre-W7 version of Paint is all it needs to be: simple enough to do a quick cropping or image downsizing.

capt_weasle wrote:Are there any differences when using Chrome? Because it seems to be fine for Firefox. It seems quite nice, I already like it better than the new MS Paint for Windows 7, which I abhor simply because the pre-W7 version of Paint is all it needs to be: simple enough to do a quick cropping or image downsizing.

Doesn't it still do that, though? Why do you hate additional features when it doesn't break anything?

I'm just acting like an old fart who is resistant to change. It's all too new and flashy. I'll take my old and simple looking MS Paint and Word, thanks.

I don't understand. Paint doesn't require an internet connection to use. That's kinda awesome.

If I needed an image editor online, I prefer http://pixlr.com/editor/

capt_weasle wrote:I'm just acting like an old fart who is resistant to change. It's all too new and flashy. I'll take my old and simple looking MS Paint and Word, thanks.

I hate the new Word.

WHAT THE FUCK IS A PEACOCK LAYER

Fuck everyone who hates the Ribbons. They're awesome to work with (faster, faster), they look amazing and believe it or not, they save a lot of your screen space.

About this webapp, I was disappointed for it being made in Flash (can't use my regular browser shortcuts while on that app - like ctrl-tab), and I really don't see in what way this beats Paint. Additional features? Pff Paint.NET/Gimp.

Also, why "Google Beats Paint"? This is not a Google product.

edit: and what pavel said

◉ ＬＡＺＯＲＴＩＴＳ ◉ wrote:and I really don't see in what way this beats Paint. Additional features? Pff Paint.NET/Gimp.

So, you seem to be saying, "Silver isn't more valuable than Bronze! People with Bronze can just get Gold!".

Good point, can't disagree with that.

I was hoping we could have a talk about the move by Google with their Chrome App Store (Which is why this is Google-related, btw) to web-based development entirely, and how this goes hand in hand with the Chrome Netbook OS.

Instead, you people seem to just really hate this thread. So, let it die.

Haha, yeah, I can totally see how you wanted to discuss about Google's new Web Store. It was so obvious in your op! Man how the heck did I miss that.

But you're right about the whole bronze silver gold thing. What I was trying to say is there's no reason why I should use this, since it adds nothing to what we already have - apart from being inside a browser, making it slower to use.


But okay, I was just checking out the Web Store. For now, it seems like a glorified bookmarks thing, but I can see how it'll evolve into...uh...what it's supposed to be.

◉ ＬＡＺＯＲＴＩＴＳ ◉ wrote:Fuck everyone who hates the Ribbons. They're awesome to work with (faster, faster), they look amazing and believe it or not, they save a lot of your screen space.

1) They aren't faster to work with if you can't find shit. For instance, in Word, why does Page Break get its own giant button under the Insert tab, yet the rest of the breaks are under Page Layout under a single tiny button. And context-aware visibility is stupid. Every option should be visible somewhere even if it currently isn't selectable, so you know you're doing something wrong as opposed to just failing to find the damn button.
2) Looks are a matter of opinion
3) How in the balls can they save me screen space if it is taking up a bunch of space I wouldn't otherwise have buttons in? In previous versions of word I would only have 1 toolbar visible, the basic one that had bold/italic/etc, font, left/right align, etc. The ribbon takes up the same width and then gobbles up 3 times the height.

As for the thread:
This looks pretty cool. I bookmarked it (and pav's link) if I need to do something on the road when I don't have my desktop with photoshop.

◉ ＬＡＺＯＲＴＩＴＳ ◉ wrote:Haha, yeah, I can totally see how you wanted to discuss about Google's new Web Store. It was so obvious in your op! Man how the heck did I miss that.

COMPREHENSION IS IMPORTANT

hairscapades wrote:Why do you hate additional features when it doesn't break anything?

It breaks indexed-image support which makes it useless for a lot of things related to pixel art. The older versions of MSPaint were good because they were very light, very simple, and set out in an easy to understand way.
The W7 version is trying to be a nerfed clone of a heavier image editing package, but I suppose it's a matter of opinion whether that's a good thing or not. I would've been happier if they'd left the underlying tech almost the same, fixed a few bugs with transparency copy and then added keyboard shortcuts and called it a day. I don't use paint for anything ever anyway, but now whenever I'm on my windows box I find myself opening up photoshop to do tiny tweaks just cause I don't want to deal with the obtuse mess MSPaint has become.

Rejoice, 7 users. MS Paint XP version.

http://www.sheeptech.com/download/mspaint.exe

Geti wrote:

hairscapades wrote:Why do you hate additional features when it doesn't break anything?

It breaks indexed-image support which makes it useless for a lot of things related to pixel art. The older versions of MSPaint were good because they were very light, very simple, and set out in an easy to understand way.
The W7 version is trying to be a nerfed clone of a heavier image editing package, but I suppose it's a matter of opinion whether that's a good thing or not. I would've been happier if they'd left the underlying tech almost the same, fixed a few bugs with transparency copy and then added keyboard shortcuts and called it a day. I don't use paint for anything ever anyway, but now whenever I'm on my windows box I find myself opening up photoshop to do tiny tweaks just cause I don't want to deal with the obtuse mess MSPaint has become.

This is a lot of rhetoric and, from the looks of things, even the only clear point you made is wrong. You're just another Luddite who hates anything shiny.

◉ ＬＡＺＯＲＴＩＴＳ ◉ wrote:Haha, yeah, I can totally see how you wanted to discuss about Google's new Web Store. It was so obvious in your op! Man how the heck did I miss that.

LAYIN IT ON THICK WITH DONFUY-STYLE ENGLISH

hairscapades wrote:

Geti wrote:

hairscapades wrote:Why do you hate additional features when it doesn't break anything?

It breaks indexed-image support which makes it useless for a lot of things related to pixel art. The older versions of MSPaint were good because they were very light, very simple, and set out in an easy to understand way.
The W7 version is trying to be a nerfed clone of a heavier image editing package, but I suppose it's a matter of opinion whether that's a good thing or not. I would've been happier if they'd left the underlying tech almost the same, fixed a few bugs with transparency copy and then added keyboard shortcuts and called it a day. I don't use paint for anything ever anyway, but now whenever I'm on my windows box I find myself opening up photoshop to do tiny tweaks just cause I don't want to deal with the obtuse mess MSPaint has become.

This is a lot of rhetoric and, from the looks of things, even the only clear point you made is wrong. You're just another Luddite who hates anything shiny.

BURN!

hairscapades wrote:This is a lot of rhetoric and, from the looks of things, even the only clear point you made is wrong. You're just another Luddite who hates anything shiny.

That's a really nice link and all, but I'm talking from experience and you're linking an uncited wiki article, and to a section that's been edited all of two times since February.

I've worked with games that need a specific palette on images for them to display correctly at runtime. Opening indexed .bmp images in Win98, XP or Vista paint preserves the palette. Opening them in W7 paint nets you an unindexed image, which is a problem for me. We still get complaints about W7 paint DRLFF-side. If there's been some patch that fixes this, that's great (and I wouldn't know, as I haven't tried to modify images with W7 paint since it broke my indexing). However, I seriously doubt it and I think you should look into such things properly before making a personal attack on someone lest you come off as an aggressive idiot.

Geti wrote:

hairscapades wrote:This is a lot of rhetoric and, from the looks of things, even the only clear point you made is wrong. You're just another Luddite who hates anything shiny.

That's a really nice link and all, but I'm talking from experience and you're linking an uncited wiki article, and to a section that's been edited all of two times since February.

I've worked with games that need a specific palette on images for them to display correctly at runtime. Opening indexed .bmp images in Win98, XP or Vista paint preserves the palette. Opening them in W7 paint nets you an unindexed image, which is a problem for me. We still get complaints about W7 paint DRLFF-side. If there's been some patch that fixes this, that's great (and I wouldn't know, as I haven't tried to modify images with W7 paint since it broke my indexing). However, I seriously doubt it and I think you should look into such things properly before making a personal attack on someone lest you come off as an aggressive idiot.

I don't know what to tell you, dude. I did look into it and, at your prompting, did so again but all I can find about Windows 7 indexed palettes is what I've already linked you to. I'm not sure whether it's Luddite bias or just user error on your part but I'm gonna have to take the word of the only third party source I can find at this point over yours. Feel free to provide your own links if you feel strongly that Wikipedia is wrong about this.

http://forums.datarealms.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=20243
http://forums.datarealms.com/viewtopic. ... 78#p383878

http://www.pokecommunity.com/showthread.php?t=228656
http://www.pokecommunity.com/showpost.p ... tcount=103

Windows 7 Paint fucks with indexing. Go open an indexed .bmp image with it, edit anything, save and close it and try to check the palette with any other software (GIMP, Pixen, GraphicsGale or Photoshop will do the job well). Wikipedia is wrong here.

Oh also, It'd be nice if you'd stop describing me as a Luddite. I'm not opposed to new technology in the slightest; I'm using a bleeding edge distribution of linux and code my own software when nothing exists to do the job.
Just because I have a problem with a facet of program from the newest version of the most mainstream operating system at this point in time doesn't mean I have a problem with the advance of technology, and similarly you not having a problem with it doesn't make you any more open minded or reasonable than me.

Geti wrote:
Oh also, It'd be nice if you'd stop describing me as a Luddite..

Geddite wrote:http://www.pokecommunity.com/showpost.p ... tcount=103

Luddite wrote:pokecommunity

I see what you did there. I dug those up on google (the google search in question for the inquisitive), to support the DRLFF links in case those were considered biased due to me being a member. I fail to see how pokemon = luddism regardless.

...Oh right you were just poking fun, I see.

=w= wrote:In a browser! If you are using Google Chrome.

I just don't know. Opening a local image from a browser is always a pain, associating local image files to a network app is basically impossible, and if it takes longer than a few seconds to load then forget about it.

I mean, the convenience of Paint is:

Download image

Double click on image's entry in the Downloads tab or Downloads window, depending on browser

Quick modifications

Save

Upload

What would make this a real Paint-killer is if you could grab an image from a URL, and upload the generated file directly to a host like imageshack or imgur or something. Until then, from a convenience standpoint, I don't see it.

Hmm, Flash. Was kind of expecting it to be HTML5. Colour me unimpressed.