For those that are looking for an alternative, humble bundle have a bundle right now which includes paintshop pro ultimate among other comparable adobe products.
Not currently, though this is a question that gets asked a lot.
One of the benefits of Gestalt is that all styling is statically resolvable. This means that all it's CSS can be built to one small file or inline styles. We get a bunch of perf. & portability for free. (Unconstrained) theming requires runtime style resolution which would negate those benefits. There are also things that we'd like to be able to change and tweak globally and those get difficult if everybody is running separate themes. We recently switched to using system fonts and we're planning on bumping the color contrast.
However, we're generally _really_ open to constrained theming (i.e. more button colors).
It is hardly impressive. Mediaval armour had about the same weight:
> A complete suit of plate armour made from well-tempered steel would weigh around 15–25 kg(33-55 pounds).[2] The wearer remained highly agile and could jump, run and otherwise move freely as the weight of the armour was spread evenly throughout the body.
But the issue there is the joints, right? As far as I know, they were either exposed completely, like at the shoulder, or not flexible enough for fast-paced combat.
Yes, I believe the joints were usually weak points. Swords-people used a technique known as half-handing, where they'd keep one hand on the hilt, and use the other hand to grip near the tip of the blade. That allowed them to use the sword more like a dagger, which gave better accuracy for maneuvering into the joint, while also giving them greater leverage with the hilt-hand.
I was surprised that you can grip a blade with your bare hand, but apparently it's safe with a firm enough grip.
If I'm not mistaken plate armour wasn't all that great against blunt weapons though, since it probably does not distribute the impact very well. Whereas I'd suspect this kevlar armour to basically swallow those punches over a larger area, no?
No personal armor (so far) is good against blunt trauma. The reason for that is conservation of momentum. Blunt weapons often rely on large amount of momentum. Only thing you can do is to make the armor bouncy. So you can try to turn it into elastic collision.
The bad shit for the weapon is that it's very difficult to change the direction of war-hammer mid course. So it's easier to block.
Kevlar makes armor of similar effectiveness lighter. But there is nothing fundamentally better than old plate armors. It's still just distributing force to larger area. With penetrating weapons this is potentially very effective, as there is relatively little momentum and energy. The idea is to have very high local pressure at the tip of the weapon and this normally cuts deep into flesh.
So morning star would be the weapon of choice there I suppose. Sword may win "by points" but with morning star you'd have a solid chance of actually neutralizing opponent.
historic plate, chain and other armors (including helmets) had significant padding, layers of it, underneath. This both stops arrows, spikes from reaching the skin and cushions spreads impact out.
Impact weapons were rare when hvy armors were in use. OTOH, heavy chopping polearms/swords (to get through joints in armor), and anything to knock plate wearer on ground (to then poke them in between armored bits) were developed and become more popular as heavier armors came about.
> Impact weapons were rare when hvy armors were in use
No they weren't. Cheap and cheerful mauls and war hammers were very popular on mediaeval battlefields - the archers at Agincourt used them as secondary weapons against knights for instance.
And of course it is easy to turn a two-handed sword into an impact weapon as well - turn it around and use a pommel strike.
19 kilos is ~42 lbs. That much weight will have significant impact on the stamina and agility of any fighter in any combat sport at any weight class...
