Post

gimp is kinda jank yeah but when people have Serious Takes about how it needs to improve all i can read is "here is how these four guys working intermittently for free have FAILED to live up to the international company making twenty billion dollars a year"

"personally i would just make it be good" great, stop fucking posting about it and get to work then

this is frustrating in a way that's hard to fit in a bleat but it boils down to people not appreciating the outright miracle that open source software is in the first place and then wanting to be treated like a customer when it's not an exact replica of something that costs $700

the thing krita and blender have in common is that PEOPLE GAVE THEM A LOT OF MONEY

the developers of other foss software aren't idiots waiting for someone to tweet "have you tried making good ux?" at them — they just don't have the resources to hire ux designers and do user studies and whatever else because they are giving their fucking work to you for free

I think it also is another thing: some people actually LIKE the 'bad' UX, so it puts them in a weird position: if they did honestly redo everything, it'd make it lose the identity that a group wanted.

I learned the GIMP in like 1999 (RTFM & experiment), with no prior pro image software experience. When I've attempted to touch pro software, I've been extremely lost & found it unintuitive. Familiarity provides a huge bias about what feels natural & sensible. I think people can forget that

Also, if you pick up a tool expecting to accomplish a certain goal, without knowing how to use that tool to reach that goal, discovering the process will feel difficult bc of learning detours. Picking up a tool just to experiment & learn how it works, then using the tool for a goal, is much easier