• cygnus@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    I think the UI and lack of non-destructive editing is holding it back more than the name, but IDK

    • millie@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      I absolutely love the UI. It’s literally a major part of why I prefer it.

      • reka@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        which is great for you, but not for anyone who has even briefly used more mainstream options

        • millie@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          Cool condescension, but I’ve been using Photoshop on and off since 2005, have occasionally used Illustrator, and used to spend an absurd amount of time with Flash. In addition to GIMP, I currently have Krita and Inkscape installed.

          I literally prefer GIMP’s UI. It doesn’t have extra shit, it doesn’t try to force me into a single window, and it goes really, really well with a multi-monitor setup. I don’t care that it doesn’t automatically edit non-destructively, because my workflow is adapted to it. Layers and folders are plenty.

          No one piece of software is going to be the ideal solution for everyone. That’s capitalistic exceptionalism infecting the rational analysis of what tool suits which user best. Photoshop may suit you better, but I’d take the sleek usefulness of GIMP over the bloat that accompanies all that extra stuff I don’t need any day.

          Why do I need an AI strapped to my tool for pixel art, pathing, and masking?

          • reka@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            8 months ago

            Wasn’t supposed to be condescending, apologies that I came across like that. I just more meant you aren’t representative of who a FOSS potential killer app needs to reach. I agree, I don’t want cloud, AI, subscriptions. But I do want a tool palette and interaction experience that doesn’t require looking at the docs to use.

            • millie@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              8 months ago

              You have literally no idea who I am or what I do.

              I used GIMP to make a mock-up of a sign for a restaurant just yesterday. Is it going to be the tool I use for the final product? No, because that’ll be in vector, but it’s a lot easier to slap something together in than Inkscape or Krita.

              ‘Killer apps’ are meaningless in comparison to useful apps. I’m an artist who needs usable tools for her work. GIMP qualifies. Personally, I find it way easier and more intuitive to navigate than Krita, Inkscape, or any of Adobe’s suite. It may not be for you, that’s cool.

              But what isn’t cool is to pretend you know about other people’s lives and what they need. Speak for yourself, you are perfectly capable of doing that. If you don’t like GIMP’s UI, that’s great. If you think GIMP’s UI is absolutely horrible for every user and nobody would ever use it for professional work… you’re literally just completely wrong.

    • Pixel@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      the UI for GIMP is so horrifically bad that I basically refuse to use it. Not like, on principal or anything, if it improves i’d be happy to give it a shot, but because every experience I’ve had with it has been pretty immediately negative, and finding solutions to problems I have seems more effort than its worth. I want gimp to be good, it’s a mature piece of software with a lot going for it, but it also feels like its design is kind of up its own ass, in a sense? It’s weird.

      • meseek #2982@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        Normally I wouldn’t take comments like this to heart. But I tried the latest beta recently after maybe 15y and wow. You’re totally bang on. I was stunned how bad the UI was. How bad the app was. Upon reading this, it all just sort of makes sense.

        I’m sad things are so bad on the Linux front that this is the most highly rated design tool. Linux community deserves better.

        • reka@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 months ago

          There’s always been a real stick in the mud attitude with GIMP. No matter how many people cry out about it’s confusing UX it’s always tried to serve the existing userbase rather than design to expand its usefulness to more people. I think this is a shame and is why GIMP never achieved what Blender has.

          I remember trying to use it the best part of 20 years ago when I wanted to make animated gifs. It was so hard to use it was easier to pirate photoshop/imageready. Then a year or so back I tried to use it as I had moved to being a Linux user and was kind of astonished that the UX was still so bloody hostile.

          I don’t think I’m a moron (though how many morons do… so take this with a pinch of salt) but trying to figure out how to do basic things like cut and paste, cropping etc. without reading documentation just goes hellishly wrong. Any time I take the time to follow a guide on how to use it I’m taken aback by how unintuitive it is and once I’m done I forget it’s idiosyncrasies immediately.

          I remember “gimpshop” being a thing at one point, which I never got to use but heard it used the processing of GIMP with a more photoshop like UX. Though I believe that project lapsed.

          Anyway, yeah it’d be nice in a world where things like GNOME have become such beautiful UXes that projects like GIMP have the courage to revolutionise themselves.

          • DuckGuy@mander.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            8 months ago

            I remember “gimpshop” being a thing at one point

            Well it might be a different project entirely, but PhotoGIMP is still a thing.

      • cygnus@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        I know what you mean — it’s like a 90s design paradigm that doesn’t take current conventions or best practices into account at all.

        • arglebargle@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 months ago

          Thank goodness. I hate most current UI.

          It’s funny that one thing I really liked about it was the floating windows and toolbar. Then everyone complained and they brought it all together. But now people I work with using software that we pay nearly a million dollars to license are getting all excited becuase they introduced… floating windows.

  • KeriKitty (They(/It))@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    This really isn’t the article it wishes it were :-\ It kinda reeks of “I’ve picked a thing I want to argue and now I’m going to make up an argument for it” down to admitting that good sources aren’t available (which makes me wonder whether there are no good sources at all or just no good sources that support the author’s argument).

    Bonus unpoints for the BDSM reference, just because I hate seeing that term held up as a negative or scary kind of thing and I feel like and/or choose to believe that’s the point in such an unprofessional article, rather than simply meaning “Look, it means sex stuff and that’s unprofessional.” So there. Nyeh! 😝

    Also, I don’t think I’ve ever heard anyone who actually used or contributed to the GIMP (or intended to) complain about the name. I’m interested in seeing some actual data on that, if there is any. Personally I wouldn’t particularly mind a name change but I can’t say whether it’d get more attention and interest than it’d lose to irritating people accustomed to the current one.

    • flora_explora@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      As far as the article goes, the word gimp isn’t necessarily seen as problematic because of its sexual reference but rather as a derogatory term for disabled people. And just because many people agree that they don’t care, doesn’t mean we shouldn’t care. Democratic decisions fall flat when they deal with issues of minorities. The large majority of people doesn’t care about disabled people. So basing ethical considerations on the majority’s opinion is really no good idea. Same goes for other discriminatory language and slurs where always the same arguments are presented. I think the article does a great job of portraying the gatekeeping biases of such discussions.

  • Shimitar@feddit.it
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    Gimp issue is not the name, it’s the outdated UI and the dumb usage decisions like saving only in it’s format. I moved to krita some years ago and I think that’s the future. Gimp will still be along for a long time, and it should as its a great piece of software. Bit that’s it.

    Alternatives are good, and having krita and gimp is good.

    Gimp name? Never even occurred to me that could be offensive. Not American here. Americans, get out of your asses (joking)… You are often offensive to the world but you don’t care (not so much joking, and ofc I am wrong in generalization), so why should the others?

  • Floon@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    The name holds it back more than you know. No EP or AD wants to put “The GIMP” on their software list for a project. I have to have a conversation with someone ensuring we’re good on all our licenses, and they ask, “What is this GIMP thing?” Answering it makes me sound like an unprofessional jackass. The company would rather just pay Adobe.

    • meseek #2982@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      I don’t even want to tell people I use it because of its name. I would never bring it up in a work setting in this day and age when I look at Slack and see everyone list their pronouns.

      The fact they haven’t clued into this is just wild to me. A shame it throws the work of so many people under the bus.

      Also, to call it after the Pulp Fiction character is insane to me. Let alone that everyone on the team signed off on it. What were the second choices? Diarrhea? Herpes? Like dafuq.

    • DavidDoesLemmy@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      I guess you can’t quantify how much the name has helped it. How many people remember it because of its quirky name. Without knowing both numbers it’s hard to know if it’s a net positive or negative.

      • meseek #2982@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        No one. No one remembers it fondly because it’s got a “quirky” name. That’s not how software works. People use software because it’s useful. Not because it’s edgy or has memorable branding. I would rather a competent design tool period. The name is irrelevant. We aren’t selling cookies or an energy drink. We are empowering people to get things done. You think your spoon with a hole in it is going to sell because you call it “Faggot”?

    • Baggins@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      This. No amount of excuses or lengthy explanations. It’s childish and unprofessional.

  • mozz@mbin.grits.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    Surely anyone who feels that it’s an urgent problem can make a fork which is fully identical in every way except for the logo and name and branding

    Since the amount of effort that would be required for that would be infinitesimal compared to what was already done to make the software

    And then produce all these good things which you say are being held back

    Or, wait, did you mean you wanted someone else to do that because you feel that it’s super important enough to insist that someone else should do it but not important enough to do yourself?

    • Stefen Auris@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      As I recall someone made the same lame argument about the name being divisive, a fork was created called Glimpse and it fell on its face not long after it was formed. Things like this are a waste of energy, nobody cares that it’s called gimp.

        • The_Terrible_Humbaba@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 months ago

          Plenty of words have multiple meanings, but I rarely think of them when I’m using a word to mean a specific thing. I know the meanings of gimp, but I never think of them when using GIMP; perhaps because it’s capitalized and I always assumed it stood for something (and it does).

          But anyway, and more importantly than that, what you describe is a problem that you might run into with any word.

          A small subset of the world population can view it as an insult, but for the vast majority it means nothing. Sort of like the word “negro” in Spanish, which some English people take offense to when they hear it. I even searched “gimp” in 3 different search engines, and the first 2 to 5 results were always the GIMP. Most people have no other concept for the word.

          Let me put it this way: you say you’d favor Kira, but how do you know that there aren’t some kids in Egypt, or Russia, or someone else in the world, that take offense to the word “Kira”?