Paint.NET is by far my most missed Windows app on linux. GIMP is a mess of UI and Pinta just crashes constantly and is lacking in features.
Pinta and krita are decent, but there's nothing about GIMP that I like.
Paint.net
61–70 of 112 posts
Re: Paint.net
#62Paint.net is the one thing I missed when I switched from Windows to Mac when M1 came out. It's a brilliant quick photo editor. People say to use Pinta on Mac but it's not the same. The closest I've found is Pixelmator Pro, which is also awesome, but is not free and quite a bit heavier than Paint.net.
Paint.Net is by far the best non-pro graphics editor ever. So practical and intuitive. To me lack of Paint.Net seems the biggest problem of desktop Linux, also of Mac. Sadly Pinta appears buggy. But it still is tolerable and has no real alternative. Both Photoshop and GIMP feel too unintuitive and this way take too much time to do simple things when you are not a graphics pro. GIMP also arguably looks ugly. Paint.Net…
Yup, Paint.NET was the thing I mourned the most switching from Windows to Linux... still do. I'm somewhat surprised that there hasn't been more of an effort to get it working on Wine. I figure there's some context I'm missing, but still. It just seems odd that so many games have been made to work, but Paint.NET is sitting with a listed rank of "Garbage".
Re: Paint.net
#63Paint.net is the one thing I missed when I switched from Windows to Mac when M1 came out. It's a brilliant quick photo editor. People say to use Pinta on Mac but it's not the same. The closest I've found is Pixelmator Pro, which is also awesome, but is not free and quite a bit heavier than Paint.net.
Paint.Net is by far the best non-pro graphics editor ever. So practical and intuitive. To me lack of Paint.Net seems the biggest problem of desktop Linux, also of Mac. Sadly Pinta appears buggy. But it still is tolerable and has no real alternative. Both Photoshop and GIMP feel too unintuitive and this way take too much time to do simple things when you are not a graphics pro. GIMP also arguably looks ugly. Paint.Net…
This is a vague memory so I might be wrong, but I think it's WinForms, not WPF, and it makes calls into Windows directly using P/Invoke so it's not trivially portable.
Re: Paint.net
#64This, Notepad++ and IrfanView are the 3 pieces of Software that truly set my Windows PCs apart from my MacBook.
Re: Paint.net
#65Paint.net is the one thing I missed when I switched from Windows to Mac when M1 came out. It's a brilliant quick photo editor. People say to use Pinta on Mac but it's not the same. The closest I've found is Pixelmator Pro, which is also awesome, but is not free and quite a bit heavier than Paint.net.
Many quality Mac apps are not free. Fair enough IMO, then we know the developer gets some income for their work and hopefully stay motivated to refine the application.
My favourite in this category is Flying Meat’s Acorn. Really nice.
Re: Paint.net
#66Paint.Net is an example of how to make great apps. Very focused, fast and easy to use.
I tried multiple alternatives, including Krita, which was the most decent. But its layout, speed, colorschemes, behaviors and some visual bugs are meh compared to subj. The most annoying is its content window black-flash when the cursor crosses the border.
Btw, does someone know a good SD webui plugin for PDN?
Re: Paint.net
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
Pinta is a fork of an older version of Paint.NET and (as far as I know) doesn't aim to be a clone.
>Pinta is a fork of an older version of Paint.NET and (as far as I know) doesn't aim to be a clone. There was a Paint.net fork (called Paint mono), but it is not Pinta. Pinta is a clone. From the original Pinta author: https://jpobst.blogspot.com/2010/02/over-holiday-break-i-stu... "Pinta is a clone of Paint.NET."
I've messed around with the Pinta code in the past and a lot of it is (seemingly) directly adapted from the old Paint.NET sources.
Re: Paint.net
#68Paint.net is the one thing I missed when I switched from Windows to Mac when M1 came out. It's a brilliant quick photo editor. People say to use Pinta on Mac but it's not the same. The closest I've found is Pixelmator Pro, which is also awesome, but is not free and quite a bit heavier than Paint.net.
Pixelmator Pro is not free, but it's pretty affordable and pretty amazing, and it's not subscription based.
Re: Paint.net
#69Been using paint.net for years. The only downside it has is mentioning it's name, because people keep going to the completely unrelated "paint.net" website. Super fucking annoying.
Anyhow, the only paint program I've used in years. I consider it to be the modern Deluxe Paint ][. Can't get anyone to use it though, because they're all clueless normies stuck in the belief they need to use PhotoShop for everything.
If that makes no sense to you, consider the insane amount of people who buy an expensive DSLR, because they believe it makes them better photographers. Hint: It doesn't.
Re: Paint.net
#70Paint.net is the one thing I missed when I switched from Windows to Mac when M1 came out. It's a brilliant quick photo editor. People say to use Pinta on Mac but it's not the same. The closest I've found is Pixelmator Pro, which is also awesome, but is not free and quite a bit heavier than Paint.net.
yes, and it's the same for foobar2000
some software can't be replaced and don't have good enough alternatives, and prevent me from switch to linux
windows is getting worse, but not bad enough to justify me switching to linux, exactly because of those softwares
it's odd in a way, because the free software for windows is generally higher in quality that the one I find on linux.
And Gimp will never replace paint.net. Inkscape also have a very difficult UI.