nospam
In article <98u6i9pi02pbpqp1uc7rd5hgjkv5g1a29m@4ax.com>, Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com>wrote:

Tony Cooper
Nik says they offer "powerful plug-ins for Photoshop and Lightroom".

Sandman
But Tony said just above that Nik doesn't claim to be plug-ins! He'll be pissed at you now.

Tony Cooper
I knowing you sometimes struggle with the language, but you should be able to understand the difference between "a Photoshop plug-in" and "a plug-in for Photoshop". That word "for" in there should be simple to understand.

nospam
you *must* be kidding me.

Tony Cooper
A "Photoshop plug-in" would be a plug-in authored by, and offered by, Adobe. A "Plug-in for Photoshop" is a plug-in that is authored by some other organization and offered as something that will work with Photoshop. Nik is offering a plug-in, a plug-in that will work with Photoshop, but not a Photoshop plug-in.

nospam
nope. you really are serious. holy shit. just when i thought i'd seen it all.

i've written photoshop plug-ins.

Tony Cooper
You've never been noted for your ability to clearly express yourself. It's not surprising you make this error.

nospam
it's not an error.

when i wrote photoshop plug-ins and talked with people at adobe, somehow they knew what i was talking about and not a single person ever said it was incorrect.

i know many software developers who have written photoshop plug-ins. i know people at adobe who worked on the photoshop plug-in sdk.

nobody says 'a plug-in for photoshop'.

Tony Cooper
"For" is used by Nik, OnOne, and at the Adobe Exchange. That's "nobody"?

nospam
ok, almost nobody.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photoshop_plugin>

<http://www.creativebloq.com/photoshop/best-photoshop-plugins-912722>