What do you think of the "Pixel image editor"?
cberger at cberger.net
Sun Apr 8 10:26:42 CEST 2007
> Looks very nice. Couldn't tell if the developer is using Qt for his
> cross-platform development or something else. Looks nice from the
> screenshots though.
He has written his own toolkit :)
> > What's to consider interesting and what not - I'll leave up to you,
> > but one thing that I liked about Pixel, is that I can have virtual
> > desktops *inside* the program (like a desktop pager of KDE) - you may
> > think it's redundant, but I liked it - I'm sure you will find much
> > more interesting stuff, that will inspire you writing the next-gen of
> > Krita :)
> This is extremely weird. Why didn't the developer use standard MDI and
> modeless dialogs instead of building a complex pager system? It's like
> using emacs for your complete desktop system.
MDI is only moving the problem of windows management from outside the
application to inside the application. That's why pixel's author has feel the
need to add a pager.
> To the devs, why is MDI so bad again? Was it the previous KMDI framework or
> is there something fundementally broken with the interface?
Yes the previous KMDI framework was broken, that's why it wasn't even ported.
And the reason MDI is not a good idea is that good windows management is
difficult to do right, and on linux and KDE we have a very good external
windows manager. The reason why MDI is so popular on windows (and only on
windows), is that windows window manager is a piece of crap.
More information about the kimageshop