4 ms·

I'm guessing that Blender has more funding available to it and/or has retained more of its senior developers, compared to GIMP. Expecting that a piece of softw

I'm guessing that Blender has more funding available to it and/or has retained more of its senior developers, compared to GIMP. Expecting that a piece of software undertakes an ambitious UI overhaul (which is no small feat) without one or both of those resources shows, to me, a lack of understanding.

tinus_hn 5y ago
It should not be underestimated how much Blender is helped by the project management by Ton. As far as I know GIMP does not have a face for the press, does not organize conferences, has no one contacting businesses for funding. And it has an unfortunate joke name.
- gurkendoktor 5y ago
  If it's any consolation, "Blender" is a actually negative word in German ("deceiver"; someone who blinds others).
  - lenkite 5y ago
    The name seems to be fitting for a 3d computer graphics toolset.
  - pantalaimon 5y ago
    The same is true for Poser (https://www.posersoftware.com https://www.posersoftware.com)
npteljes 5y ago
I agree. Two things come to mind regarding the interface of GIMP. One is what you wrote - that it needs a product manager and tons of manhours just to do what's essentially a refactor. Not to mention that GIMP devs said that many UI changes would imply backend changes too, because of limitations. And they are working on those limitations, among other things. Second part of the point is that Adobe must have like 50 people work on Photoshop, and I guess even more when you consider the overlaps with their other products. Compare this to the active contributor number to GIMP. The second point is that many people compare it to Photoshop like Photoshop is a gold standard of usability. It's just as a nightmare as GIMP if you're not used to it. So, it's not really GIMP's fault that people are used to something else.
dagw 5y ago
I think the fact that Blender has had same person steering its development since the days when it was an in-house tool for a small animation studio makes a tremendous difference. The other factor is that Blender was always a tool by and for actual companies doing real commercial work and understands those needs. GIMP on the other started as a university project that got picked up the GNU project, and has always been more of a 'research' project.
yCombLinks 5y ago
From my historic experience with both, the GIMP project always seemed actively hostile to UI change suggestions, and even keeping their name is a thumb in the eye to going mainstream. Blender has been more about being a good product from the very start, I've been following it since before it was open sourced. It's current success is a path it started walking way before it had lots of devs and resources.
- Mandelmus 5y ago
  Blender was extremely hostile to UI change suggestions as well until only recently when they changed things drastically with the insanely successful Blender 2.8 project. From then on donations (including corporate sponsors) grew massively. Blender has made massive strides in the past few years, and much of it can be attributed to them changing their stance on UI/UX changes.
- prokoudine 5y ago
  > From my historic experience with both, the GIMP project always seemed actively hostile to UI change suggestions We ask for rationalization of suggested changes. For some reason people think it's hostile.

tinus_hn 5y ago

It should not be underestimated how much Blender is helped by the project management by Ton. As far as I know GIMP does not have a face for the press, does not organize conferences, has no one contacting businesses for funding. And it has an unfortunate joke name.

gurkendoktor 5y ago
If it's any consolation, "Blender" is a actually negative word in German ("deceiver"; someone who blinds others).
- lenkite 5y ago
  The name seems to be fitting for a 3d computer graphics toolset.
- pantalaimon 5y ago
  The same is true for Poser (https://www.posersoftware.com https://www.posersoftware.com)

npteljes 5y ago

I agree. Two things come to mind regarding the interface of GIMP. One is what you wrote - that it needs a product manager and tons of manhours just to do what's essentially a refactor. Not to mention that GIMP devs said that many UI changes would imply backend changes too, because of limitations. And they are working on those limitations, among other things. Second part of the point is that Adobe must have like 50 people work on Photoshop, and I guess even more when you consider the overlaps with their other products. Compare this to the active contributor number to GIMP. The second point is that many people compare it to Photoshop like Photoshop is a gold standard of usability. It's just as a nightmare as GIMP if you're not used to it. So, it's not really GIMP's fault that people are used to something else.

dagw 5y ago

I think the fact that Blender has had same person steering its development since the days when it was an in-house tool for a small animation studio makes a tremendous difference. The other factor is that Blender was always a tool by and for actual companies doing real commercial work and understands those needs. GIMP on the other started as a university project that got picked up the GNU project, and has always been more of a 'research' project.

yCombLinks 5y ago

From my historic experience with both, the GIMP project always seemed actively hostile to UI change suggestions, and even keeping their name is a thumb in the eye to going mainstream. Blender has been more about being a good product from the very start, I've been following it since before it was open sourced. It's current success is a path it started walking way before it had lots of devs and resources.

Mandelmus 5y ago
Blender was extremely hostile to UI change suggestions as well until only recently when they changed things drastically with the insanely successful Blender 2.8 project. From then on donations (including corporate sponsors) grew massively. Blender has made massive strides in the past few years, and much of it can be attributed to them changing their stance on UI/UX changes.
prokoudine 5y ago
> From my historic experience with both, the GIMP project always seemed actively hostile to UI change suggestions We ask for rationalization of suggested changes. For some reason people think it's hostile.