Didn't MacWorld run an article featuring Pixelmator a few weeks ago? What's the deal? Nothing else worth writing about?

It wasnt long ago that the market was essentially Adobes Photoshop () at the top with Gimp and Graphic Converter fighting for a distant second and third place.

I'd be stunned if GC isn't the most widely-installed raster image editor in the Mac market.

Which is also two versions back compared to Windows, with no Intel version in sight.

You mean besides the announcement a few weeks ago that it would ship early next year?

I really wish MacWorld did more in-depth reviews. Here is an example where they missed an important fact. They write in the review: "In addition to the big features, Pixelmator’s “little things” make the program a pleasure to use. Take the eyedropper tool, for instance..." It is common knowledge that the eye dropper has a major bug in Pixelmator (read their support forum). If you use the eye dropper to select a color and then use the paint bucket to fill an area with that selected colors, the new color does not match the old/selected color. They are blaming this on the color profiles (not sure why), but this is not the correct behavior for an image processing program. How can one work with the eye dropper if one can never predict the selected color will match?? In general like Pixelmator a lot and I think it will only improve with time. They seem to be working hard on it and I will continue to upgrade, but that sentence should've read "Pixelmator's "little things" make the program a pain to use. Take the eyedropper tool, for instance..."