Layers...Gimp...Photoshop..........

thefool · Post by **thefool** » Sun May 14, 2006 3:00 pm

techjunkie wrote:
Trond wrote:And very slow.
I agree that it is slow (and bloated, as all .NET applications), but some functions are really good.

All .net app's arent slow and bloated. Its just plain wronG to sAY that..
And the functions are, perhaps ok, quite FEW!

NoahPhense · Post by **NoahPhense** » Mon May 15, 2006 1:37 pm

techjunkie wrote:No one are using Paint.NET?!? It's really good IMHO.
http://www.eecs.wsu.edu/paint.net/

Yeah that program is nice.. I need to re'download it.. I used it a while back
looks a little different.

- np

josku_x · Post by **josku_x** » Mon May 15, 2006 2:05 pm

Paint.NET is good, for most cases but because it needs the .NET framework, it isn't so popular. I use Adobe Photoshop, it's really nice and very easy to use IMO.

techjunkie · Post by **techjunkie** » Mon May 15, 2006 2:15 pm

thefool wrote:
techjunkie wrote:
Trond wrote:And very slow.
I agree that it is slow (and bloated, as all .NET applications), but some functions are really good.
All .net app's arent slow and bloated. Its just plain wronG to sAY that..
And the functions are, perhaps ok, quite FEW!

"wronG to sAY that..."

Well - all the .NET applications (about 8 - 9) running on my laptops are slow and bloated, but I'll guess I'm unlucky then...

blueznl · Post by **blueznl** » Mon May 15, 2006 2:15 pm

official registered photo impact user here

Trond · Post by **Trond** » Mon May 15, 2006 3:54 pm

thefool wrote:
techjunkie wrote:
Trond wrote:And very slow.
I agree that it is slow (and bloated, as all .NET applications), but some functions are really good.
All .net app's arent slow and bloated. Its just plain wronG to sAY that..
And the functions are, perhaps ok, quite FEW!

Show me one that isn't then.

thefool · Post by **thefool** » Mon May 15, 2006 5:27 pm

techjunkie wrote:
"wronG to sAY that..."

Well - all the .NET applications (about 8 - 9) running on my laptops are slow and bloated, but I'll guess I'm unlucky then...

just joking

@trond; Things like PlasticSniffer is quite fast, however sometimes you dont need speed. For some things, you dont need the fast execution speed but rather a fast builtup. Different tools for different things.

I would also like you to get KBILLING, as an example of a fast, serious .net app (its written in vb.net by Karbon from this forum.)
http://www.k-billing.com/

Trond · Post by **Trond** » Mon May 15, 2006 7:01 pm

kBilling was actually quite impressive. PlasticSniffer was definetely not, though. It used almost the same time to start as kBilling, totally unacceptable for such a small program. And imagine how much faster kBilling would have started if it was written in PureBasic!

thefool · Post by **thefool** » Mon May 15, 2006 7:25 pm

Trond wrote:kBilling was actually quite impressive. PlasticSniffer was definetely not, though. It used almost the same time to start as kBilling, totally unacceptable for such a small program. And imagine how much faster kBilling would have started if it was written in PureBasic!

The startup times might be slow, but i mean how they work. PlasticSniffer, when sniffing is started, works quite good here. The gui sucks though

but glad you see kbilling works in an OK speed for such a program.
The one can always use purebasic for speed critical things, but i do NOT doubt it was easier to make a thing like kbilling with .net.