Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Photoshop’s journey to the web

web.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 203 posts

Re: Photoshop’s journey to the web

#151

Post by jb1991 »

orangepurple wrote: post #53

> Why Photoshop came to the web The entire section is a deception. The real reason is to strong arm everyone into a subscription model where you never own the software that runs on your computer. That's the real end game, not this nonsense about how easy it is to launch an application if its a URL in a browser.

Subscription pricing models are hardly unique to Adobe. I can’t even find any decent accounting software that doesn’t require some kind of a subscription. It’s pretty common, for better or for worse.

Re: Photoshop’s journey to the web

#152

Post by dang »

wgx wrote: post #4

A polite reminder that the (quite extraordinary) Photopea[0] is available which replicates most of Photoshop's features in the browser, and is free - with a paid ad-free option. 0. https://www.photopea.com/

Discussed in a few past threads:

Photopea: A free alternative to Photoshop used by millions of people - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26898836 - April 2021 (5 comments)

AMA: Ivan Kutskir, creator of Photopea - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26768550 - April 2021 (267 comments)

AMA with the Creator of Photopea - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24143189 - Aug 2020 (6 comments)

Reddit AMA on Photopea, a free alternative to Photoshop used by 1.5M people - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18397380 - Nov 2018 (179 comments)

My name is Ivan and I want to make the best photo editor - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15924402 - Dec 2017 (80 comments)

Surface Blur and Median - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12612720 - Sept 2016 (34 comments)

Photo Pea 0.3 – New features - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6624264 - Oct 2013 (7 comments)

HTML5 image editor wants to replace Photoshop and Gimp - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6396474 - Sept 2013 (4 comments)

Re: Photoshop’s journey to the web

#153

Post by ChrisArchitect »

wgx wrote: post #4

A polite reminder that the (quite extraordinary) Photopea[0] is available which replicates most of Photoshop's features in the browser, and is free - with a paid ad-free option. 0. https://www.photopea.com/

polite thank you -- not sure if I checked it out in the earlier days or something but hadn't been back and stunned at how GIMPy it is (in a good way). And totally jump-right-in useable. Impressive.

Re: Photoshop’s journey to the web

#154

Post by avian »

dperfect wrote: post #88
wgx wrote: post #4

A polite reminder that the (quite extraordinary) Photopea[0] is available which replicates most of Photoshop's features in the browser, and is free - with a paid ad-free option. 0. https://www.photopea.com/

The fact that Photopea is better than GIMP in so many ways (does GIMP still not have adjustment layers for non-destructive editing?), and was created by one person is a little depressing, but also inspiring at the same time.

You know what's more than little depressing? That each time any similar topic comes up you don't have to scroll down very far to find someone in the comments that will bash GIMP for some random thing.

You're comparing an ad-supported/subscription web service making a good part of 6 figures per year with software maintained largely by volunteer work for the past 20+ years.

Re: Photoshop’s journey to the web

#155

Post by mhoad »

zz865 wrote: post #125
mhoad wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are a few things already here or “coming soon” that will 100% let you leapfrog JS. WASM still has no concept of garbage collection which means that by default it’s limited to a smallish number of languages that are viable. That’s changing in the not too distant future it seems as the plans for garbage collection are well underway already. It also has no ability to do DOM manipulation meaning you end up in a sce…

Thanks I wasn't sure why wasm was mostly limited to C++/Rust right now but the memory makes sense. Flutter is great except for Dart - another language.

I felt the same way my desire to learn a new language was somewhere between low and none at all.

I’m happy to say when I’m wrong though, it ended up as probably my favourite language of all after not too long.

It’s often described as the love child of Java and JavaScript where they took the best from both and got rid of the most hated parts of both too. But it ends up as a really nice and performant language to build apps in and is supported by a lot of amazing dev tooling to make life easier.

Re: Photoshop’s journey to the web

#156

Post by franga2000 »

enumjorge wrote: post #85
orangepurple wrote: post #53

> Why Photoshop came to the web The entire section is a deception. The real reason is to strong arm everyone into a subscription model where you never own the software that runs on your computer. That's the real end game, not this nonsense about how easy it is to launch an application if its a URL in a browser.

Speaking of ulterior motives, the way web.dev presents itself on the surface as a general web development learning resource feels a little icky, especially since it's clearly very Chrome-focused once you dig in. It's weird to me that what is essentially content marketing for Adobe gets a blog post on this site instead of the Chrome team's blog. As others have mentioned this browser-based Photoshop works only in Chrom…

Yeah, I actively avoid web.dev becauee every time I read something there I end up being steered towards another Chrome-only nonstandard feature. MDN is always clear about what's supported where and when features are Firefox-only, it clearly warns you and provides alternatives and fixes for other browsers.

Re: Photoshop’s journey to the web

#157

Post by kiryin »

I, for one, do not like this. Software that doesn't exist on your computer, but instead gets ephemerally downloaded from a server somewhere when you wish to use it, is about as anti-user-freedom as I can possibly imagine. I can ony hope this doesn't become the standard.

Re: Photoshop’s journey to the web

#158

Post by Jyaif »

avian wrote: post #154
dperfect wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that Photopea is better than GIMP in so many ways (does GIMP still not have adjustment layers for non-destructive editing?), and was created by one person is a little depressing, but also inspiring at the same time.

You know what's more than little depressing? That each time any similar topic comes up you don't have to scroll down very far to find someone in the comments that will bash GIMP for some random thing. You're comparing an ad-supported/subscription web service making a good part of 6 figures per year with software maintained largely by volunteer work for the past 20+ years.

The takeaway is that a large community of volunteer can be beaten by a single full-time software engineer.

Re: Photoshop’s journey to the web

#159

Post by Jyaif »

Shadonototra wrote: post #144
wgx wrote: post #4

A polite reminder that the (quite extraordinary) Photopea[0] is available which replicates most of Photoshop's features in the browser, and is free - with a paid ad-free option. 0. https://www.photopea.com/

they only share a similar name and UI/UX it doesn't even support 10% of what Photoshop is capable of, including performance and handling of RAW files

Most people use less than 10% [1] of what Photoshop is capable of. It is the subset of features that is used by 90% [2] of people that Photopea covers. That means Photopea could take 90% of the market share of Photoshop, which is pretty good return on investment!

[1][2]: Like in the parent's comments, all percentages are made up.

Re: Photoshop’s journey to the web

#160

Post by [deleted] »

Shadonototra wrote: post #144
wgx wrote: post #4

A polite reminder that the (quite extraordinary) Photopea[0] is available which replicates most of Photoshop's features in the browser, and is free - with a paid ad-free option. 0. https://www.photopea.com/

they only share a similar name and UI/UX it doesn't even support 10% of what Photoshop is capable of, including performance and handling of RAW files

[deleted]
Post reply on HN