3 ms·

Krita seems to be coming along nicely and I'm very happy it exists. But it's no Photoshop. I'm more positively surprised every time I check it out. As opposed

Krita seems to be coming along nicely and I'm very happy it exists. But it's no Photoshop. I'm more positively surprised every time I check it out. As opposed to Gimp, which always feels like a poor man's Photoshop, Krita seems sensible and tasteful. But it's no Photoshop. Until/if Adobe releases its suite for some blessed distro, I can't use Linux on my day to day machine. I believe there are a lot more people in my situation than Adobe seems to think. We are pros and love to tinker with our tools. Linux is, to a fault even, the tinkerer's OS par excellence.

pippy 7y ago
Krita is not an image manipulation tool, it's a digital painting application aimed at artists. Comparing the two is like saying that oranges are inferior because they're not a truck. GIMP on the other hand is an apt comparison. Linux users are best to use photoshop under wine.
- tambourine_man 7y ago
  > Krita is not an image manipulation tool, it's a digital painting application aimed at artists There’s a big intersection between the two groups
MonaroVXR 7y ago
You can always check photopea.com It's a photoshop in the browser.
- pavlov 7y ago
  Anything in-browser just doesn't qualify for the pro market. They have gigabyte-sized files on fast local disks, they're not going to start uploading those to a cloud application.
  - mdre 7y ago
    Photopea is not a cloud application.
hellozee 7y ago
Number of people gained on releasing a linux port is low, since most of them are existing customers. Thus the cost to port to a new platform is not justified. Why not contribute a little every month to Krita so that it can hire more developers to work, if Krita has the budget of Photoshop, it would just blow it out of water. PS: Right now there are 5 full time devs and 2 part time, :)