Definably not, it's sad though, I used to you it on my XP.
yes in the future
not sure
no i dont think so
deffinately not
Definably not, it's sad though, I used to you it on my XP.
It's very unlikely that they'll make a truly native version, seeing as it would be much easier for them to make a winelib one.
2010 IBM Thinkpad 510, 4GB RAM, i5-540M, NVS 3100M
Running Ubuntu 11.04
You're missing the point. Pixel might be good, but it's still a change from what professionals are used to. Every now and then I hear "No, I don't want an alternative, I want Photoshop. If Linux does not have Photoshop, I can't migrate." But I never heard anything even remotely like "What? Linux does not have my favorite CD burning software? I can't migrate!"Well Pixel is almost as good, better then GIMP and is only sixty bucks yet no one will buy it.
Commercial software will always be ignored or pirated by some, but if it's good enough, professionals and companies who need it will buy it.
What "Linux" is resistant against is not relevant, because the company is free to compile and release their products like they want. For example, Windows does not include a Java VM by default, so some companies who sell Java software work around this by including a small, standalone JVM in the package.Why not have more distro independent stuff like I would like to use Firefox 3 on some older distros? Linux has been very resistant to static stuff.
There's no higher authority in Canonical, Red Hat or the Linux Foundation that can forbid them from doing so. That's why the Linux port of the Flash plugin is still going strong, despite the complaints of free software purists.
Last edited by Keyper7; January 4th, 2009 at 09:21 PM.
PhenomII 720x4@3.65gHz w/Zalman cooler,PNY Nvidia GTX260, 4GB, Arch64
Bookmarks