• pyre@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    6 hours ago

    dude if your ui is unusable you’re gonna hear about it.

    you can’t make an open source car that has two joysticks instead of a steering wheel and talk about industry standards and vendor lock ins when people say it sucks.

    I mean it’s cool that it exists for non drivers who sometimes want to jump on an open source car for a quick trip but if driving is your job then the joysticks being technically functional won’t cut it.

    that doesn’t mean you have to copy everything 1:1, if people are looking for alternatives one reason might be that not everything about the standard car is great. affinity has some great differences in tools but they’re designed in a way that makes sense to pro users.

    I’ve said this before but there’s a severe lack of designers in the open source space. there should be a platform that enables designers to relatively easily contribute to open source projects without learning git or whatever the fuck.

    • 2910000@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      4 hours ago

      a platform that enables designers to relatively easily contribute to open source projects without learning git

      Reading this made me a bit sad.
      On the one hand, I understand how tools like this could be a hurdle for someone who isn’t heavily invested in their use. And on the other, as someone who has tinkered with open source projects, I know that as hurdles go, git is the first of very many hurdles that must be cleared when contributing to a large, mature GUI program like this, and it’s a pretty low one at that.

      It would be great if more people could contribute to and help develop open-source versions of tools they themselves use, but I can certainly see how tough it can be starting out

      • iopq@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Not low at all. After you contribute the maintainer be like “can you rebase it all to one commit”

        And then you end up force pushing and ping 4000 people

        Or you accidentally close your pull request

    • JojoWakaki@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Open source software design sucks because they don’t have desginers (who know git) because they can’t attract designers (who know git) because they don’t have money (free and open source) because they don’t have big userbase (which can lead to more people donating) because oss software design sucks.

    • RightEdofer@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Not only a lack of designers, but the very concept of them is held in contempt among way too many in the open-source world (like this thread even).

  • SpiceDealer@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Wait, you can’t make circles in GIMP? This has to be false. If my memory serves me well, I remember using GIMP for a school project back in the day and I’m pretty sure it could make circle.

    • Suite404@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      7 hours ago

      You can, it’s just not as simple as click on circle shape maker. You have to make a circle with the circle selection tool than turn it into a path. It’s only difficult when you’re first figuring it out. Once you do, it’s not a big deal.

      • rumba@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 hour ago

        It’s only difficult when you’re first figuring it out. Once you do, it’s not a big deal.

        I’ve been using Photoshop and Gimp a lot over the last decade. There are a few things I like better in Photoshop and nothing I really like more in Gimp, but they’re both absolutely serviceable.

        I wish content-aware patch came by default in Gimp and I wish Gimp had more user-friendly macroing, but if I’m drawing circles in my photo editor, my first thought is why the hell am I not using a vector editor.

  • golden_zealot@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    13 hours ago

    Under the hood I actually really like GIMP. I’m also not too bothered by there being no circle tool. My problem with GIMP is that if there were a circle tool in it, its a little too difficult to find it if it does exist.

    If they had some front end re-write eventually where they just moved some stuff around and better organized the front end of the application, I think a lot more people would use it. UX/UI is really important, and I’m sure the contributors of GIMP know this as they seem to have done well to try to make the interface feel straightforward by putting stuff under menu’s and whatnot, but the location of things just seems unintuitive/non-standard compared to what every other application does.

    The other issue I have with GIMP is just that its development cycle takes forever compared to most every other open source application I have seen.

    Not to say there is a great answer to any of this, image manipulation/animation software is not an easy thing to program by any means so I understand why it can take forever, but I just wish there was a real answer.

    In the mean time, I’ve just been trying to get by with krita, though krita really seems geared toward digital painting specifically.

    • alyth@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      9 hours ago

      A great remedy to stuff being hard to find is that you can press the slash key / to open a command palette

    • 10001110101@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      11 hours ago

      Not saying GIMP’s UI is great (I only use it occasionally), but efficient UI isn’t necessarily an “intuitive” UI. I.E. an intuitive UI may not be efficient for a professional that takes the time to learn it and works with the UI ~40 hours/week.

      • golden_zealot@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        9 hours ago

        True, but I prefer intuition over efficiency when I pick something up for the first time, second time, and third time, until I eventually have a good enough understanding to begin worrying about efficiency.

        There are use cases for Libre office writer, just as there are for vim, even though they are both capable of producing text documents. One is arguably more intuitive while one is arguably more efficient, but if I didn’t know anything about word processing/text editing and had to pick between the two, I would pick writer.

        Same goes for anything else, and it’s also why a decent number of text editors/software support emacs/vim bindings - so that you can use the software intuitively, and then once you understand it, you can become more efficient by using modal bindings. Same goes for GIMP versus other software. The thing about other softwares in the same genre is that they can be learned relatively easily and can also be used efficiently. GIMP I find harder to learn, even if it is efficient later.

        For anyone who is new who has to make a choice as well - very few people would pick vim to start out with.

        Furthermore, in this instance, I do have a decent amount of photo editing experience and have used multiple softwares to do it, but even after that, the problem I have with GIMP is that a lot of this knowledge does not transfer to GIMP like it does for other software. If I learn photoshop, I can get away with using affinity, krita, corel draw, clip studio, and other software - but not nearly as easily GIMP.

        I would also argue that efficiency is equally dependent upon the software as it is the task. The workflow for digital painting, animation, and photo editing are all quite different, and no one UX/UI is the most efficient at all of them. This is why most of these softwares have modular interfaces, which is good, but I simply find the modular interface of GIMP harder to use or understand versus the rest.

      • swelter_spark@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 hours ago

        I’ve never been into vector graphics, but I had reason to use Inkscape recently, and I was actually surprised by how easy to use it was and how much the UI made sense.

      • golden_zealot@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 hours ago

        I have used inkscape though it has been some time. I felt as though it was not super featureful at the time so the UI felt slightly barren compared to something like Adobe Illustrator, but I don’t recall having the same kind of trouble with it that I do with GIMP honestly.

      • Rooty@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        3 hours ago

        Blender is so versatile, and has so many applications that you have to end up with a cluttered interface. Since the alternatives have licenses that have a steep cost, I would say that putting up with a clunky interface is well worth it.

      • golden_zealot@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        9 hours ago

        Haha, yes the feeling is similar there, though I think I personally still had an easier time learning blenders current workflow.

          • golden_zealot@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            8 hours ago

            I only see one on your previous comment, but it could be because blender has recently started getting a better reputation for usability/learnability.

            6 years ago I touched it and I was horrified, but I touched it a few times this year and found they had made some good improvements.

    • wraithcoop@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 hours ago

      Hi, this complaint sounds vaguely familiar and I know it’s just indicative of that type of problem, but can you elaborate on what you mean by no circle tool?

      I haven’t used GIMP in a long time but if I remember correctly there’s an ellipse tool and I think there’s a modifier that can constrain the aspect ratio so you can make circles. I might be wrong though.

      • golden_zealot@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        9 hours ago

        I think what you are thinking of is the ellipse selection tool, and yes this exists and can be used - however I am referring to the tool class of geometric shapes which is quite common among other software. Basically it creates a vector (In most cases I think) shape with options for stroke and fill, and controls the same way that the ellipse selection tool does (constraints etc.).

        GIMP does not have this, instead you have to go through a decent amount of trouble to get simple geometric shapes drawn to the screen, and at that I believe they are always raster.

        Take these procedures as an example for GIMP.

        https://www.alphr.com/make-shapes-gimp/

        This makes GIMP difficult if you want to use it for some niche uses such as making a quick flow diagram, or a quick vector mask which can be changed later.

    • Owl@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 hours ago

      You can replace GIMP with Blendee or Freecad and it works just as well

  • VampirePenguin@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    14 hours ago

    Vendor lock in is the reason I went to a fully open source workflow like fifteen years ago. When you rely on these companies for tools, they own your work. They can jack up prices, change TOS whenever they want, paywall features, train AIs on your work, and jerk you around on a chain at their whim. I don’t mind a little jank or having to do some workarounds for a certain result to keep my freedom. And also, when a new release comes out that fixes an issue ive been having, I feel grateful! In the closed ecosystem you feel entitled and resentful and powerless. It’s not worth it.

    • lapping6596@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      14 hours ago

      I’m most of the way there except jet brains… I just don’t have it in me to spend the years it’ll take to become as familiar with a different tool.

      • ThePyroPython@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 hours ago

        As an engineer: 1000% agree.

        Seriously, why do I have to pay a value somewhere close to £1000 for a set of FUCKING PDFs?!?

        This is ridiculous. Make money from audits, certifications, training, and conferences. You can still make absolute stacks from those. Why the fuck do I or my company need to shell out thousands just so we know what to certify against to be able to sell stuff?!

        It’s a fucking racquet and they know it. But it’s either one of 3 options:

        • Find someone who’s willing to send you the PDF or log in credentials for a library service that has access to these standards.

        • Take the risk downloading PDFs from dodgy sites you found on the 5th page of duckduckgo.

        • Bend over and spread open your wallet. Because good luck getting anything delivered to a customer without it.

        • The Menemen!@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          7 hours ago

          Around here most companies just have subscriptions or get to them through university libraries. It is still annoying, i aggree. Ot is funnier once you realize that they completly rely on free work as well.

          That said, standards are imo one of the greatest t achievements of humanity. And if you’ll ever be involved on that process, you’ll quickly see why this whole thing is expensive.

          If you don’t want to pay that much, don’t curse at ISO, put pressure on your government to provide ot for free. Imo well invested tax money.

          My personal main problem is that companies sometimes infiltrate the process.

      • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        2 hours ago

        I was going to make a gif tutorial but I screwed up the recording and I’ve lost all motivation.

        File, New, set resolution multiple of 1000, like 2000x2000

        View, Show Grid

        View, Snap to Grid

        Image, Configure Grid, set pixels under Spacing to desired height, if aspect ratio is checked it will automatically adjust the width to match, like 50x50 for example

        Zoom in towards center, click and drag vertical and horizontal ruler to the center using the location value on the bottom left

        Create first transparent layer

        Select brush tool, the big circle brush, and set size to 1000 and click at the center

        Select eraser tool, set size to 960 and click center

        New layer

        Brush to 700, center

        eraser to 670, center

        New layer

        brush to 60, between rings

        eraser to 40, on new dot

        New layer

        Using brush at size 20px, click and shift click to create lines, draw a square and a right triangle in the top-left quadrant in the centermost circle by connecting points on the rim.

        Select every layer, copy and paste

        With new layers selected, select all

        Transform, Rotate, ensure that the centerpoint is the actual center with the on screen reticle, and rotate the circle 90 degrees. Repeat process but rotate 180 degress.

        Export image, you’re done.

        EDIT: I guess I didn’t really explain Whitespace Utilization, you can use a white brush instead of eraser to cover the layer beneath.

        Once you’re ready to export, flatten image to a single layer and then under color, color to alpha, white should already be selected

        Add a new layer, white layer, move the layer to the bottom of the stack

        Done

  • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    15 hours ago

    Hey, I was a GIMP convert even during the long dark ages of GIMP where you couldn’t do any kind of bulk layer selection or moving or lots of maddening things… and you know what I kept fucking using it because it was always there for me, ready to help me make a shitty meme.

    GIMP has recently gotten MUCH better though, it is a straight up beast now.

    • LeFantome@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      12 hours ago

      I agree.

      Just recently, I used GIMP 3.0 to create what will become a sticker on the side of a dozen hockey helmets.

      It was a small project but it probably went back and forth a dozen times as each version delivered sparked new ideas or new questions on what was possible. Layers, filters, alpha channel, Smart Selection, and working with text and font outlines were all essential.

      I don’t do all this stuff all the time. There is no way I would ever pay for Photoshop. Yet, my standard Linux install had everything I needed to get it done. And it was not that hard.

      Truly amazing when you think about it. We are all so entitled.

      • m4m4m4m4@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        12 hours ago

        We are all so entitled.

        That’s exactly my issue with GIMP. We are all so entitled, even GIMP devs.

        You don’t want to include a feature to draw an editable circle/square/polygon? Fine, but then don’t get superdefensive nor “counterattack” when people ask you about this feature. All in all, pretty much every other image manipulation program has it, so it’s understandable people wonder why GIMP doesn’t have it. I for one still can’t wrap my head around why this is a no-no for some people. It doesn’t make any sense.

        When I was majoring as graphic designer I used to use GIMP for a bunch of stuff, even played with python-fu and saved me some time I never would have saved with Photoshop or some shit like that, but even back then they always answered to everything some variation of “we are short on resources”. Well at that time Krita (which was even called Kpaint) had even less resources than GIMP and look at them now.

      • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        11 hours ago

        Truly amazing when you think about it. We are all so entitled.

        Almost as entitled as the corporations who want to charge us rent to do something relatively simple like this on a modern computer, and have actively attempted to undermine general accessibility to tools like this in order to profit more.

  • melfie@lemmings.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    edit-2
    16 hours ago

    I was contemplating switching from Cinema4d to Blender for a long time, but the UX of C4d was so nice and Blender’s frankly sucked. Then 2.8 came out with a UI overhaul that changed all that and now I’d never dream of switching to another 3d package when Blender is so easy to use, extensible with Python, and has a huge community around it. Blender’s popularity soared after the UX changes. Sometimes, a UI overhaul can make all the difference.

    Even where Blender falls short, there’s usually an addon that fills the gap, often paid, but still open source, which is 1000x better than competing options that almost always involve a subscription.

    The benefit of a community of open source software around it also can’t be overstated. For instance, MakeHuman kicks ass, Auto-Rig Pro makes it usable for mocap and character animation, etc. Blender Studio’s projects like Flamenco render farm and automated Blender Studio pipeline built around the also open source Kitsu that I self-host are also amazing. Collectively, it all blows Autodesk out of the water and should be a shining example to all other open source projects.

    • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      13 hours ago

      To give a specific example of how powerful Blender is, in geology there are very very very very expensive 3d modelling programs and then there is like… Sketchup which I guess Google hasn’t abandoned? idk… even the basic GIS software for geologic mapping from ESRI is expensive AF, especially if you want to do any fancy 3d rendering or map making.

      Enter this guy

      You already know this guy is cool as fuck just from that photo, but let me tell you how exactly how lowkey cool Marcus Schwander is.

      (btw I have zero connection to this guy, I know next to nothing about him, I literally just found his videos from searching “Blender Geology” on youtube randomly)

      His video series shows quite clearly and exhaustively how to do extremely complicated geologic mapping of complex fold belts with lots of faults using Blender. What I can’t stress enough is that the workflow he is detailing in the proprietary software world would be EXTREMELY niche, require exhaustive licensing and setting up payment and getting software keys… blah blah blah and ultimately it would be a very expensive workflow, possibly requiring software licenses that cost thousands of dollars or more (I am not kidding). On top of the prohibitive cost, any kind of documentation, additional plugin development, or content creators who make tutorials about how to use the tools is an order of magnitude rarer for those tools because access to the tools in the first place is so prohibitive (and is usually only along narrow circumstances, not the kind of situation someone would organically decide to make a youtube tutorial channel about a software that costs $30,000 a license necessarily). In contrast, try searching for “Blender tutorial” in youtube and just take a cursory glance and the absurdly exhaustive amount of resources out there about learning Blender.

      I have been teaching myself Blender because I want to make similar tutorial videos because it is ridiculous to me idea that in 2025 geologists don’t have an open format to visualize geologic structures and map them in a natural 3d environment that can be then shared with other geologists, in a established non-proprietary format that a geologist can ensure that any other geologist can open and view the model/data themselves, because again if you have a computer you can get Blender…

      I am firmly of the belief that Blender should be taught as a basic part of a Geology curriculum along with a GIS class, not a primary focus or anything, but the tool is so general and so broadly useful that I think we owe it to future scientists to teach everybody we can how to use Blender.

      As a last point, I want to emphasize that I am not suggesting using Blender to make cool fancy cinematic visualizations of Geology because it looks cool, or suggesting trying to do lots of complex modelling and computation in Blender instead of a GIS software, those are both awesome uses of Blender but what I am suggesting is that by simply teaching the next generation of Geologists how to use a 3d modelling software just for the simple purposes of giving them a tool to sketch out ideas or explore a geologic map from a 3d perspective (which can be useful ESPECIALLY when talking to other people about specific geologic structures that are difficult to explain without a 3d perspective to point to) Blender is going to forever change how Geologists use computers to do Geology.

      It is a cool moment because on the flip side… there is a LOT of money in Geology and I think the Blender community could and will absolutely find serious, sustainable long term funding from Geology companies and academia associated entities that could massively bolster development capability and funding security.

    • BackgrndNoize@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      16 hours ago

      No everything in Linux has to be used through the terminal, how else will I feel elite. If there has to be a gui let’s make sure it looks like it was designed in 1995, so everyone hates it and just uses the terminal instead

      • interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        14 hours ago

        Just use the terminal to send keyboard and mouse events, you hopeless noob!

        wtype -M shift "A" -m shift
        wtype -k enter
        swaymsg seat seat0 cursor set_position 100 200
        ydotool mousemove -100 50
        ydotool click 0`
        

        In fact it’s even more efficient!

  • dreadbeef@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    64
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    19 hours ago

    Yall just use Krita if you want a photoshop replacement on Linux and then stop complaining about gimp please. Krita draws circles exactly like photoshop please just use Krita and leave the gimp people alone

    • Abnorc@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 hours ago

      Yeah this is a reasonable take. GIMP has its core set of users, and, even though I could be wrong about this, I suspect that they like the UI as it is. They’re not beholden to making the most generalized image editing software for Linux.

    • MonkeMischief@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      10 hours ago

      I’m a huge Krita fan! But like others I mostly use it for the drawing and painting.

      How is it as an alternative to GIMP? (Which I use for simple cut and pastes and that kinda thing.) I haven’t actually been able to figure out where the wall is that says “No, use GIMP for this.”

      Does GIMP maybe have better filters and layer operations and that kinda thing maybe…?

      • dreadbeef@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        10 hours ago

        Pretty much every filter I need from PS like levels, curves, unsharp mask, blurs, etc are there and I even get all of my layer styles. If you were familiar with photoshop circa cs3 era I honestly think it’s just better, but I’m a Linux user and software engineer, not a professional graphic designer or photo manipulator

        I avoided it for so long and just used photopea online instead because I thought krita was just for drawing and I don’t do that. I’m sure it’s fantastic for that but I don’t draw and was so used to photoshop I didn’t imagine it’d be basically a better version of it and written in QT, but I was pretty surprised at how it’s just that

  • GissaMittJobb@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    149
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    22 hours ago

    Downplaying the importance of UX is one of the reasons the year of the Linux desktop still has not arrived.

    • Nalivai@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      62
      arrow-down
      32
      ·
      21 hours ago

      If by importance of UX you mean “your program should look and behave exactly like this other program made by a corpo, because I’ve learned that one already”.
      In reality The Year Of The Linux might never arrive, it doesn’t have a multibillion corporation spending multi billions in order to make Linux a default software on every computer you buy. (to pedants: Android doesn’t count)

      • RightEdofer@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 hours ago

        That is NOT at all what people are saying. They’re saying that glueing together 15 different UX paradigms into a program is not as intuitive as something designed before it was coded by people with expertise in exactly that. Design is real no matter how much you don’t want it to be. This attitude is directly hurting open source software.

      • nasi_goreng@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        43
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        18 hours ago

        No. Importance of UX simply means advance users can customize their workflow while making it easy to use for casual users.

        Kinda like Krita or Blender. Both are not perfect, but the dev are working on it, together with the community.

        Even GIMP dev also working on that, they have GIMP UX issue tracker here: https://gitlab.gnome.org/Teams/GIMP/Design/gimp-ux/

        “your program should look and behave exactly like this other program made by a corpo, because I’ve learned that one already”

        Oftentimes established workflow is already simple. There’s no need to reinvent this from scratch. Example: Npainter and AzPainter are heavily inspired by PaintToolSAI. Inochi Creator is a clone (with unique feature) of Live2D Cubism.

        • Nalivai@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          14
          ·
          17 hours ago

          Oftentimes established workflow is already simple

          Not in the example we’re talking about though. Photoshop isn’t simple, nothing in it is. And for the software that is, it doesn’t mean you can’t come up with the better UX. We shouldn’t discourage people from trying to invent something better just because it isn’t what we already have.

          • nasi_goreng@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            20
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            17 hours ago

            I believe when majority of people saying “Photoshop has this, we should do this as well” are not actually saying GIMP should create a total carbon-copy.

            People loves easy to use interface, not carbon copy of Photoshop, even if they don’t say that. They just don’t know how to articulate their frustration better.

            When Affinity Photo emerges as actual Photoshop alternative, no one complains regarding “not being Photoshop clone” because the interface is actually easier than Photoshop, while still being advanced software.

            New GIMP user complaining about interface “not being Photoshop clone” is indicator that GIMP interface is not easy to use and intuitive enough.

      • embed_me@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        27
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        20 hours ago

        I think the difference is with their software you can play around the UI and figure out things by intuition and trial and error

        The same thing is not enough in FOSS in many cases. Like for ex, drawing solid shapes in GIMP

        • Nalivai@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          31
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          20 hours ago

          For three years I worked teaching computers to adults, and for four years I was a system administrator/helpdesk for a big office.
          I can absolutely assure you, from my experience, there is nothing inheritly easier or harder to figure out in close source software vs foss, in windows vs linux, in gui vs console, in Photoshop vs Gimp.
          The only difference is, what did a person encountered before. The idea that you can give a person photoshop and they will draw you a sold shape, but you give the same person gimp and they will not be able to never stood up to my experience with probably thousands of people.

          • embed_me@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            edit-2
            14 hours ago

            I for one have never used Photoshop but I used to use Gimp occasionally for some semi-technical markup and annotation. I remember being baffled by how to make a hollow circle, as opposed to a solid one. I kept forgetting the process so I had to look it up every time. Nowadays I just use canva since I don’t want to analyse menus and tool options every time. I don’t have to use Photoshop to say that Gimp’s UI can be better. Anyway, I also use Audacity extensively and although it’s not as outstanding of a case as Gimp, the older versions were a pain, nowadays it’s much better but still plenty to improve (I have not used other audio editing softwares)

            Then again I learn software by intuition and exploring menus (rarely I go to read the manual, as do majority of the people I imagine), if I was taught how to use it by someone like you, maybe things would be different, but I doubt that’s how most people interact with software.

          • inverted_deflector@startrek.website
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            12 hours ago

            There are definitely a lot of little things in gimp that make it hard. The lack of a shapetool is one(yes yes it’s not a drawing app but a basic edition helps) and other things like adding text with a black outline or shadow. After literally decades they finally added in a way to make it easier to image macro text in. The old way involved several submenus and I know I couldnt figure it out on my own without a guide.

            I know sometimes people come into an opensource ecosystem and complain that everything is worse because they arent used to it, but at the same time there are a lot of open source programs that are very rough around the edges and the developer cant see it because they know the program inside and out so of course it’s intuitive that this feature is burried in here and this feature way in there.

      • ☂️-@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        14 hours ago

        no, we want the tried and tested workflow that works well for pros to use.

        take it as someone who used photoshop professionally in the past.

        • Nalivai@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          14 hours ago

          That’s what I mean. You used photoshop professionally, you are used to its interface, you want everything to have the same interface so you don’t have to learn a new one. It’s normal, we all are like that. The problems start when you try to hide it behind words like “intuitive”, “industry standart”, and “good for everyone”

          • ☂️-@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            14 hours ago

            say what you will about adobe and you might be right, but photoshop was perfected over years for an efficient pro workflow, and the industry coalesced around how similar software works.

            to the point GIMP is not an effective tool. I would excuse them for trying to make it actually “intuitive”, but as it stands, its neither “industry standard”, nor “good for everyone”.

            this is my point. wanna come up with something better? please do, but its not close.

      • Pulsar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        19 hours ago

        The year of of the Linux happened long ago. However we fail to recognize it, because wasn’t exactly what we were expecting. Most super computer is TOP500 as well as servers and majority of portable devices in the world are powered by the Linux kernel.

        If the definition of Year of Linux was based on having astonishing UX then, this is probably something that will never happen.

        • Nalivai@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          19 hours ago

          They don’t sell all-purpose computers, they sell gaming systems that run Linux underneath. The regular user never has to interact with the OS

          • Lv_InSaNe_vL@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            18 hours ago

            They also don’t sell that many of them.

            Some quick googling says that Valve has sold nearly 4 million decks, which is pretty good.

            Lenovo sold ~62 million computers last year alone. And they only make up ~1/4 of global market share

          • dreadbeef@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            19 hours ago

            I guess all valve has to do is release steam machines again and then what? Suddenly the year of the Linux desktop isn’t here?

            • Nalivai@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              8
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              19 hours ago

              We’re talking about regular users having Linux as their operation system, not what happens under the hood of specialised machines. Steam machine user doesn’t run Linux, they run Steam.

              • frazorth@feddit.uk
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 hour ago

                They don’t run Windows they run Explorer.

                Linux is a kernel. They run Linux.

                Or do you mean “they don’t run KDE/Gnome/LXDE”?

    • AugustWest@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      16
      ·
      edit-2
      6 hours ago

      Nonesense. There is no easier to use and more functional desktop with great user experience than Linux. Been that way a long time. People are just used to poor UX and want more of it.

      Edit: I would love to hear from the downvoters how windows, with its constantly changing interface, ads, poor file manager and poorly thought out workflow design is somehow better than linux. And stick with win 11 as that is the standard now.

      As for Mac, talk about confusing. Where are your files? What is happening at full screen, what menu is doing what? I will say macs are great when you get used it, especially if you use keyboard shortcuts.

      More downvotes for the truth. I have taken people who have barely used a computer before and tried them on Linux or windows. Windows is always a mess and does things in unsuspected ways or is missing a basic feature.

      Linux works just fine, and out of the box from any current distro the environments are pretty much ready to go. That is just the truth.

      • frazorth@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        49 minutes ago

        I’ve used MacOS for about 20 years, and it’s a shit show. But…

        Where are your files?

        They are in my user folder, same as every other OS. I can see them all in Finder. Root is hidden, but that’s options “tick box to display disks”.

        What is happening at full screen

        So what you would consider maximise is “move to new dedicated virtual desktop”, but you can also cmd+click maximise, drag to the top to traditional maximise or left/right for half screen.

        I will say macs are great when you get used it, especially if you use keyboard shortcuts.

        I’d say the opposite. How do I move this window to the next desktop using shortcut keys? You have to display desktops and then drag or to the desktop you want. No real shortcut for a basic feature.

        Emoji picker also seems to be broken, so when adding something on a chat I have to navigate with keyboard because clicking on the emoji I want works about 50% of the time, they rest of the time it just closes the window.

      • rtxn@lemmy.worldM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        12 hours ago

        There is no easier to use and more functional desktop with great user experience than Linux.

        Ignoring the fact that you make it sound like Linux has a single unified desktop experience…

        I’d love to hear your reason for thinking that. I’m a Linux fanboy and even I’m smelling the bullshit.

        • AugustWest@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          6 hours ago

          True. But each of them are more or less polished enough for any user.

          I mean pick one.

          Give me the argument that this isn’t true.

    • selokichtli@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      17 hours ago

      Naaah, it’s just companies like Adobe, Autodesk and Microsoft shitting on Linux users each time they can.