Linux doesn't have Photoshop

Post by rolltiide » Sat, Dec 28, 2019, 9:41 PM UTC

hellozee wrote: post #20

rolltiide wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes the same reason for the past two decades If anyone from Adobe is reading this, I would use CC with subscription on linux and advocate for licenses in my whole office if it was an option Cheers

You didn't get it right? Most of the customers who would switch are already using CC on Mac or Windows so why add the costs of maintenance and support for another platform. Aside from that, their code base is somewhat quirky, which would definitely increase the cost of porting

Post by hellozee » Sat, Dec 28, 2019, 9:49 PM UTC

rolltiide wrote: post #21

hellozee wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You didn't get it right? Most of the customers who would switch are already using CC on Mac or Windows so why add the costs of maintenance and support for another platform. Aside from that, their code base is somewhat quirky, which would definitely increase the cost of porting

I understood what you said exactly and thats why I also added the part where new licenses would also happen as a single customer datapoint accessing many organizations over my career. The more datapoints for them the better. I look forward to the day when Krita or GIMP’s sole purpose for existing isn't Adobe dug their own hole.

Post by thrower123 » Sat, Dec 28, 2019, 9:57 PM UTC

sfc32 wrote: post #2

Hats off for developing such an amazing tool. The question not asked is "Why create another image editing tool on Linux?". When 'competing' with a gorilla like Photoshop, perhaps extending / rewriting Gimp would be a more effective way to produce a high quality tool, instead of fracturing the community. Not a criticism of the efforts, just the focus. It would be really great to have a FOSS alternative to the increasi…

Post by hellozee » Sat, Dec 28, 2019, 10:05 PM UTC

grawprog wrote: post #26

errantspark wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly because this person is incorrect in their supposition that Krita competes with Photoshop. Gimp competes with Photoshop (extremely poorly), Krita is OSS Corel Painter and it's great at that. They're all image editing tools sure, but the focus is different.

Just curious, because i've never really understood, I see this a lot without much explanation. I've used gimp for years for various image and photo things and haven't used Photoshop since the mid 2000's, what's so bad about gimp in comparison, other than the ui(which to me seems much the same as old versions of photoshop), to Photoshop?

Post by faceplanted » Sat, Dec 28, 2019, 10:21 PM UTC

Finnucane wrote: post #16

Linux doesn’t really have a good alternative to InDesign. For photo editing I find that Darktable & Gimp serve me well enough. Fortunately, I don’t need to worry about CMYK any more.