31–40 of 306 posts
changing the GUI for a good reason makes sense, making it look like photoshop doesn't seem like a good idea. Photoshop is an arse to use, just like the GIMP. I just happen to have learnt gimp first.
Excuses abound. "There are too many features" So? Do the work. Organize them. "GTK doesn't have xxx, doesn't allow yyy, we have to wait until GTK 5 comes out..." No? Just do the work. Add those features to GTK itself or find a workaround. Open-source is built one patch at a time, so a big rewrite can never happen. But what's worse, to me, is that people build up this cognitive dissonance that it's some framework's fa…
A lot of FOSS projects could do a lot of amazing things if they had enough people who "just do the work".
This is a shortcut for Cut+Paste, which I always use anyway because I find it more intuitive.
What's up with the thick lines around UI elements? it all looks so 2008.
It sometimes looks to me like absolutely 0 designers are actually involved in open source, at all
If Blender could radically update their UI and UX after 25 years of the initial conception, I feel like any (FOSS) project could do it too, no matter how many options and technical details the software has.
Blender has something else. Loads of money compared to Gimp.
Gimp was designed by open source hackers with no input from professional designers, or seemingly even any interest in their input. It never gathered any kind of momentum as a credible Photoshop replacement for professionals.
And that’s why Blender is getting donations: it’s become a serious part of workflows for all kinds of companies who have a 3D content pipeline. Meanwhile Gimp is still the awkward collection of hackers’ image processing pet projects piled into a clunky GUI that does nothing to enable the things that designers actually use Photoshop for.
This is a terrible idea. The menu bar works great, integrates with shortcuts, and gives 100% discoverability. Anyone who wants to get rid of it is a bad developer and a bad person.
Meanwhile gimp probably has lower % usage rate than it did 20 years ago. Improvements are needed, and this is just menus in a popup box anyway
Please don't do this. You know that isn't true.
If someone wants menus in a pop up box, you can simply hide the menu bar until the user presses Alt (or F12 depending on your OS's convention).
Inventing an entire new weird system for pure novelty while saying "fuck you" to accessibility for disabled people... is just not okay behavior.
changing the GUI for a good reason makes sense, making it look like photoshop doesn't seem like a good idea. Photoshop is an arse to use, just like the GIMP. I just happen to have learnt gimp first.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's still ironic to me that the program that GTK was made for and that popularized the toolkit, haven't managed to move to its latest version yet.
Gtk3 and Gtk4 have been ...well, gimped, and don't have many features. They've been removed in Gtk3/4 by GNOME developers because their DE does not prioritize things like keyboard entry (as compared to mouse use, see gtkfilechooserwidget.c in gtk3/4 not supporting keyboard based pasting of file paths without errors, https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gtk/-/issues/5872 ). Gtk2 hasn't fallen victim to this slow erosion of…
My firsthand knowledge of such things is quite stale nowadays, but I get the impression the RH desktop group is barely on life support at this point. That GTK4 happened at all strikes me as surprising, but could be interesting long-term in terms of modernized GPU support for the toolkit attracting new usage/developers.
The real question is do enough people even care about GTK anymore to make use of it in the future. I'm inclined to believe the current crop of devs want $hipster-language-native GUI packages. Not awkward quasi-"idiomatic" bindings and FFI wrapping an archaic C library like GTK/glib.
This is a terrible idea. The menu bar works great, integrates with shortcuts, and gives 100% discoverability. Anyone who wants to get rid of it is a bad developer and a bad person.