Re: Tonight's the night

[Michael Aranyshev] "With this statement you insult too many people."

I'm not "insulting" anyone unless it's someone who has a particularly thin skin.

I'm reciting my factual experience.

On it's release, nobody actually "understood" the full functions of X's since those specific capabilities in that configuration had never been seen before.

I'd been editing nearly daily in Legacy for 10 years, and it took me easily more than a month to begin to properly understand how X worked . Are you claiming that there were people who opened the program up and "got" it fully on that first day? If so, I'd like to meet them, because they're clearly a lot more clever than all of us here who've been debating this program for a year plus.

It's historically accurate to say, however, that there were plenty of loud public voices "decrying" it from day one.

My contention is that in many cases, the trashed it without understanding it properly - a practice that continues, tho much muted as more people have actually investigated it for themselves.

It's a year later, and again in almost daily use, I'm still finding things in X that I didn't fully comprehend up to very recently. (Batch re-naming comes to mind as an example)

I have great respect for the people who've been here exploring X it in this community and who can articulate the reasons that they continue to find it lacking for their type of work.

What I don't have respect for is those who continue to contend that it's a poor general editing tool - but who don't seem to understand the basics of how it functions.

This is the heart of the entire debate on-going debate here.

Want proof? Go over to Techniques. Turn off your "kill newbie posts" filter and read for a while.

it's not "insulting" to claim that a thing is widely mis-understood - if in fact the thing IS mis-understood.

Not by all, certainly - but still by many.

My 2 cents.

"Before speaking out ask yourself whether your words are true, whether they are respectful and whether they are needed in our civil discussions."-Justice O'Connor