• @CrypticCoffee@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    11
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I’m not, but it’s not like it’s an occasional thing. Every time it’s brought up, it’s trashed. Free software that does a better job than anything else free, and folk bash it. Either they like and are motivated by Adobe dominance, or they’re useful idiots.

    It’s balanced to say “great program, but could do with a UI improvement”. It isn’t to say it’s unusable because of UI. I cannot imagine any free software advocate should be proud of taking that line.

    • @PopOfAfrica@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      81 year ago

      We don’t need to praise the software specifically because it’s Open Source. We need good Open source Software of which there are plenty of great examples.

      Blender, Krita, Libre Office, Audacity. These are great. Better than the paid competitors in a lot for ways.

      Gimp and scribus are simply not. That should mean we start developing good FOSS software to fill that gap, as a collective.

      • @CrypticCoffee@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        811 months ago

        Tenacity, not audacity. Audacity got took over by a company with questionable record and tried to add telemetry into it. Tenacity was the OS fork which stayed true to principles.

        GIMP may not be your bag, but it’s highly used and many find it has much higher quality features than the alternatives. UI may not be popular, but it doesn’t prevent it being a solid bit of open source software.

        Btw, what steps have you taken to improve open source graphics software? It’s easy to bash, it’s harder to learn and contribute.

        Open source contributors > open source advocates > grateful open source users > almost everyone else > open source critics

        • GizmoLion
          link
          fedilink
          311 months ago

          One doesn’t need to be a dev to have opinions about ease of use of a piece of software, don’t be dense.

          • @CrypticCoffee@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            511 months ago

            That is true, but to get free software made by people in their free time and say “this is rubbish” is a little ungrateful.

            “Here, have this free food…”. " ewww gross, that is so bad".

            • @PopOfAfrica@lemmy.one
              link
              fedilink
              2
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              I’m saying is that there is tons of open source software that isn’t crap. Gimp has no excuse it should be as good as the others.

              Especially one as mature as Gimp.

              • @CrypticCoffee@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                111 months ago

                Considering I know many artists that use it as first choice, I know you’re wrong.

                It’s good software, you just don’t like it.

                • @PopOfAfrica@lemmy.one
                  link
                  fedilink
                  211 months ago

                  Well, I guess your anecdotal evidence is as good as mine, because nobody in my design circle will touch the damn thing. Meanwhile Blender is the standard for 3d designers I know.

                  • @CrypticCoffee@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    111 months ago

                    Blender is for models, not art. It’s different software. It’s great at what it does. Expecting that because one open source project can beat proprietary then all can is a pretty shallow view. A project relies on volunteers, sacrifice and funding.

                    You’re saying it’s bad because no one you know uses it doesn’t suggest no-one uses it, just you don’t know the users of it. Maybe your circle is as open minded to software as you are. Similar people surround themselves with each other. It says more about you than the software.