Pixel compared again

Czech Computer magazine made image editors comparison again, just one year after previous one. In November 2004, Pixel got 4th place (among programs like Photoshop, Photo Paint, Paint Shop Pro, Ulead PhotoImpact and GIMP). This year Pixel got great 2nd (PDF, 400kb) place, loosing only 2% right after Photoshop CS2 and leaving others behind. They of course ignored fact that Pixel is still beta.

16 thoughts on “Pixel compared again

  1. Trebor S

    It’s not amazing at all. There are plenty of examples of one-man products that beat the sh*t out of programs developed in large companies. Some examples that I use are FASM, IDA Pro and Irfanview. As soon as you start getting groups working on programs, you loos focus, because everyone wants to see their features. (Sadly, that’s what’s now also happening with Freepascal…)

  2. FRANK

    Ya el solo Hecho de comparar pixel con photoshop y corel painter es un gran logro y subrayo que es trabajo de una sola persona.. ademas de ser el unico realmente multiplataforma y de utilidad profesional.. pixel esta por encia y muy lejos de la competencia solo por ser el unico que aporta soluciones graficas en :Windows, Linux, MacOSX, BeOS/Zeta, MorphOS, QNX, eComStation and DOS..eso es grandioso. y no margina al resto de los usuarios del mundo PC.. gracias PAVEL y cuentas conmigo para trasladar al Spanish..

  3. Ivan de Jesus Deras

    It’s an amazing software, taking into account that it runs in 8 platforms, and was developed by one person. I would like to know what GUI he (Pavel) used, or does he implemented his own GUI library? In that case It would be interesting that at least that part could be released as Open Source.

  4. Pavel

    Yeah I made my own GUI toolkit called eLiquid, it’s not suitable for open source release yet as it is tied together with Pixel too much and is missing documentation. But I might think of that in future.

  5. GodBeast

    Hey Pavel! Congratulations! I really admire people like you, your soft is amaizing, even as a beta. I wonder if Adobe or something will even pay you to work for them or to stop your own projects;) – I hope they will loose customers for your program::)) Pozdrowienia z Polski!

  6. Pavel

    eLiquid is not really based on SDL, this backend can be changed anytime. You can see that in DOS version, there’s another backend for VBE video cards.

  7. Romulo

    “Yeah I made my own GUI toolkit called eLiquid, it’s not suitable for open source release yet (…). But I might think of that in future.”

    That would be really great. GUI is _the_ factor that stops me from using FreePascal. If you release eLiquid as a separate project, I would certainly colaborate to it (even buy if it is not a bloat/too-expensive ware).

    BTW, congratulations!

  8. Blestan Tabakov

    hi!
    GREAT JOB PAVEL!!!
    about the GUI… please release it :)) for many years ‘im also writing a DTP program called PageFluid it will be good if we can joi efforts and make the both programs better and better using one unique gui …

  9. murad

    I wonder what it takes to be a programmer of such calibre.

    How can one achieve such programming skills?

    Congrats, Pavel.

  10. Administrator

    It’s nothing special… it just takes a lot of time and patience to figure things out. It took me 8 years of work and 3 complete rewrites, because I found out I made it wrong and redesign was needed 🙂

  11. Gerhard Gaußling

    Yes, it’s incredible, that you did it all alone.
    This is a killer app! It seems to be very very fast, and has got cms support for icc profiles, and offers a color depth up to 32bit, and HDR capabilities!

    Congratulation Pavel!

    I’m curious about the text in that magazin, but unfortunately I’m not able to understand it.

    Can you, please, make it available in english?

  12. Administrator

    Uh, it’s quite big for translation and Czech is not my native language (but it’s very similar). I’ll try to find some online translator that will translate it from Czech to English.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.