On Tue, 7 Nov 2000, David Monniaux wrote: > On Tue, 7 Nov 2000, Kati Gäbler wrote: > > > A friend of mine was showing off his latest Gimp for Windows the other > > day that he had found on some magazine CD. I didn't test many of the > > features, but it seemed very stable and far superior to the version that > > I have. > > The latest Gimp for Win32 versions are available from > > http://user.sgic.fi/~tml/gimp/win32/ > > Only Gimp 1.1.x exists for Win32, so no "stable" version of Gimp, strictly > speaking, exists for Win32. Also, Gimp for Win32 (actually, Gimp > compiled for Windows) tends to be less stable than the Unix versions. The deal with "odd-numbered" versions of any package is not that they actually *ARE* unstable - but just that the developers choose not to *PROMISE* stability. Hence it's a matter of caveat emptor. Also, with a complicated package such as GIMP, there may be large areas of stability dotted with small areas of flakiness. If your application and habitual usage pattern avoids the flaky areas, you may well see a particular version as stable - whereas someone else may see it as the most horribly broken package on the planet. ---- Steve Baker (817)619-2657 (Vox/Vox-Mail) L3Com/Link Simulation & Training (817)619-2466 (Fax) Work: sjbaker@xxxxxxxx http://www.link.com Home: sjbaker1@xxxxxxxxxxx http://web2.airmail.net/sjbaker1
