4 ms·

It was my understanding that Pinta is essentially Paint.NET, and is available on Mac as well as Linux and Windows: https://pinta-project.com/pintaproject/pinta/

• aargh_aargh 10y ago
  Well, it's like comparing a go-kart to a sportscar. Pinta crashes on me a lot and has a fraction of the features.
  • Sir_Cmpwn 10y ago
    When was the last time you tried it? I dismissed it for similar reasons when I first tried it, but then I tried it again about a year later and it was fine. Eventually I just manned up and learned how to use Gimp, though.
    • aargh_aargh 10y ago
      I've been in fact using it from its very beginning and I've been getting the latest version (currently 1.6) from a PPA. It's handy for the same things I use Paint.NET for - it just feels more clumsy, despite tryig to be similar. I appreciate both for being lightweight.
  • baldfat 10y ago
    Paint.net has feature? I find it is just a simple quick raster editor with little to no features. What am I missing?
    • aargh_aargh 10y ago
      A ton of plugins... To be honest, I didn't check if Pinta supports those and I rarely use any in Paint.NET. Being lightweight, quick to start with just the essential features is what I appreciate in both. It's just that for my simple uses (stitching bitmaps together, resizing, getting color values, pixel-perfect alignment, working with multiple buffers, turning toolbars on/off, editing in layers) Pinta feels much clumsier than its big brother.