91–100 of 131 posts
Photopea should be GIMP's permanent embarrassment. I can't believe running a webapp offline written by a single person is more viable than a native program developed by a vast amount of contributors over decades.
I've always been surprised that Figma hasn't acquired Photopea. I guess Adobe could do that now.
Not sure if Adobe has any other reason to acquire Photopea other than to kill it so that there's no more "free" Photoshop alternatives.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agreed. As a longtime Photoshop user, I was gobsmacked the first time I used Photopea at just how good it was. Gobsmacked even more when I found out it was all written in JS and completely running in the browser with no server backend. EDIT: apparently my enthusiasm is outdated. I just tried to load the site in Firefox [latest version] and got the following error: "Your browser is too old (no WebAssembly). Please, up…
You likely have a browser setting that needs to be changed. It runs fine for me in Firefox.
Photopea should be GIMP's permanent embarrassment. I can't believe running a webapp offline written by a single person is more viable than a native program developed by a vast amount of contributors over decades.
Is the state of GIMP annoying and frustrating? Sure. Is it a failure to more effectively allocate resources to work on a fairly critical piece of software? I think so. But if you look at the technical side of things it's not that clear-cut at all. Remember that back in the day GIMP had to invent their own toolkit (GTK).
Being a webapp is probably an advantage here. What's the big thing for GIMP 3? The port to GTK 3. Does that really add anything for users? Not really, as such. But that kind of stuff is quite a big time-sink and doesn't really add any features. Same with the new build system, wayland support, i18n changes, etc. which doesn't really "do" anything other than keep the thing from bitrotting.
Photopea has had someone work on it full-time for over 5 years; if you put that against the evenings and Sundays that people work on GIMP, and consider all the "plumbing" they had to do that Photopea doesn't have to deal with then the differences in time spent are probably much smaller than you'd might suspect at a glance.
First off kudos to Ivan - both because i love being a fan of the underdog, but also because what he built really is great! (Maybe a little also because i am definitely NOT a fan of adobe. sorry.) There are a cople of quotes here that are intriguing to me... > "...From 2012 - 2016, Photopea had no monetization plans built in. And after graduation, Ivan only produced $29k in the first year and a half of monetizing..."…
> Once again, kudos to Ivan for such a wonderful thing that he built, and for providing with himself a livelihood!! Agreed. But he had to slog on this for years making zero . It would be nice to have a way to get people like him some money before something goes viral. It also goes to show that "Most overnight successes are 10 years in the making."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Krita on the other hand is really great and getting better every day. I'm all in on Krita and believe it will be the next Blender.
Blender and Krita are model examples of how to run FOSS projects. Excellent software and excellent projects.
If this product is just a few static javascript files, what keeps someone else from just taking these and hosting them on their own site, building up their own user base and pocketing the money?
Copyright laws?
I love this concept, I just worry about people stealing it.
Photopea should be GIMP's permanent embarrassment. I can't believe running a webapp offline written by a single person is more viable than a native program developed by a vast amount of contributors over decades.
Gimp is a permanent embarrassment of humanity itself. Literally the worst software I have ever used.