231–240 of 310 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> GIMP has failed to live up to a lot of its promises, Which failed promises are you referring to specifically?
I have a 2 year old desktop apple computer and GIMP gets about 2 fps for simple tasks like using the pencil to draw. (maybe it's better on linux or PC)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've never looked at Krita because it's always been referenced to me as a painting application primarily and not an image editing / photo manipulation tool. I understand there may be some cross over in functionality, but aren't they essentially built for different purposes?
I don't know; a lot of people say something like that but they never seem to give a concrete example of what the different things they need are. Krita has always been able to do all the photo editing I ever wanted to.
"Krita is the full-featured digital art studio.
It is perfect for sketching and painting, and presents an end–to–end solution for creating digital painting files from scratch by masters."
So it is not at all clear to most people that it is a tool that can also be used for photo editing.
Still no adjustment layers, still no layer styles. It’s so easy to just critique away…but really? Really? Those are just absolutely essential image editing software features. What have they been prioritizing ahead of that?
Adjustment layers are on the 3.2 roadmap. https://developer.gimp.org/core/roadmap/#gimp-32 No idea what the timing of that version is.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't know; a lot of people say something like that but they never seem to give a concrete example of what the different things they need are. Krita has always been able to do all the photo editing I ever wanted to.
Looking into it, Krita does seem very capable. I don't think we should really be mad at healthy competition existing in these spaces though, they should lead to better tools for end users.
Some of this software has been around as long as I've been alive.
I love Open Source but we should just accept that some of it will always be mediocre at best. And as the other commenter mentioned, there are also negative consequences to something being around (mind share, presence in distributions and online docs, etc).
Nobody has time to wait 4 decades for software to be good.
This makes successful Open Source software like Blender or Firefox or Linux all the more impressive.
I get why people take issue with GIMP, but I'm glad that it exists and has existed. Back in the day I got a lot done with GIMP for both fun and school work, and it was great that it worked both on Windows and Linux. Better tools are around now, and GIMP has failed to live up to a lot of its promises, but I don't get why people need to shit all over it. No one is making you use GIMP. It's honestly amazing that people…
What frustrates me is that it somehow sucks all the oxygen away from e.g. Krita, which is better in all the ways that matter. And frankly most of the whole Gtk/Gnome umbrella is like that. I don't know if it's just americans not wanting to touch a European project or what, but it's just infuriating.
And I encountered this before and left the website on opening it.
> I don't know if it's just americans not wanting to touch a European project or what, but it's just infuriating.
It has "Krita is a professional FREE and open source painting program" with FREE straight out of scam ad.
"painting" is of no relevance to me, I edit photos. None of examples has photos - all are drawing editing (I opened https://krita-artists.org/t/maybe-mention-photo-editing-at-t... according to their bug reporting guidelines)
Prominent self-ad/sponsor banners/5 star testimonials adding to scam feeling.
It seems less prominent now but I remember that it previously had some vaguely NSFWish animeish art on website. And startup screen has some disfigured cross of human and bunny(?) what for me is worse than "Gimp" as name.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I don't know if it's just americans not wanting to touch a European project or what, but it's just infuriating That's some weird complex. I doubt most people know what piece of free software is European versus American. I further doubt it has any meaningful impact on adoption.
I agree it's bizzare, but why else would it be that all the US Linux distros use Gnome and all the European ones use KDE?
Red Hat/Fedora uses Gnome because Gnome is basically a Red Hat product. This has nothing to do with the geography of the distro.
Unfortunately, a lot more people use Gnome. Which is a shame in my opinion. But it is the way it is.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Looking into it, Krita does seem very capable. I don't think we should really be mad at healthy competition existing in these spaces though, they should lead to better tools for end users.
We should drop this "healthy competition" myth. Some of this software has been around as long as I've been alive. I love Open Source but we should just accept that some of it will always be mediocre at best. And as the other commenter mentioned, there are also negative consequences to something being around (mind share, presence in distributions and online docs, etc). Nobody has time to wait 4 decades for software to…
Noone claims that all open source is great.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I needed this the other day. CMYK output is in the 2.99.xx nightly builds and works fine. Export only, can’t work in cmyk natively.
So it took 27 years to add CMYK support? Well there is progress I guess.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree it's bizzare, but why else would it be that all the US Linux distros use Gnome and all the European ones use KDE?
Social graph? Americans tend to know other Americans, Europeans other Europeans, on account of geographic and political proximity. Possibly the divide is a symptom of the underlying communication network.
I don't know why. Maybe it was RMS who pushed for GNOME as back then Qt wasn't free software (as in FSF or OSI approved license). Maybe it was that KDE started in Europe and later GNOME in the US to provide an alternative to the “non-free” KDE.
This caused European funding (from companies and institutions) to go to KDE, and US funding to go to GNOME, thus creating the communities and ecosystems we have today.
Another point for GNOME back in the day for companies, was that it was (could be?) more locked than KDE and it had less customization options. These are desirable traits if you want to install it to your company's workstations, so maybe it made sense for Red Hat to adopt GNOME.
The key point in time where GNOME became way more popular, was when Ubuntu came out with GNOME as the default desktop. A smaller point was when Novell bought SUSE, so SUSE switched to GNOME, leaving almost no commercial distros that default to KDE.
All in all, it doesn't matter much anymore. Our life and workloads have moved to the cloud and locked down devices, thus limiting the surface area of desktop environments and their ecosystem.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree it's bizzare, but why else would it be that all the US Linux distros use Gnome and all the European ones use KDE?
Do they? Ubuntu, Mint are both European are using Gnome or at least GTK. Red Hat/Fedora uses Gnome because Gnome is basically a Red Hat product. This has nothing to do with the geography of the distro. Unfortunately, a lot more people use Gnome. Which is a shame in my opinion. But it is the way it is.
Mint I'll grant, though I always thought of it as a thin fork of Ubuntu. Interestingly the first version was based on Kubuntu - I wonder what motivated them to change, but the old release notes appear to have disappeared.