4 ms·

I just love when people demand everyone's muscle memory to be overturned in a free tool for "better UX" because they themselves are too lazy to learn a new work

I just love when people demand everyone's muscle memory to be overturned in a free tool for "better UX" because they themselves are too lazy to learn a new workflow.

sippeangelo 5y ago
I can't tell if you're speaking for or against GIMP's unintuitive UX here.
kehrin 5y ago
This is exactly the attitude that made Photoshop end up with the absolute worst UX ever. So bad, I'd argue it's the reason Adobe just gave up and spread out new features across multiple other tools.
- mbrodersen 5y ago
  The vast majority of people prefer to pay $ for Photoshop instead of using GIMP for free. That’s how bad GIMP is.
  - Woodi 5y ago
    > "vast majority" More like everyone who do anything serious with pictures.
  - kehrin 5y ago
    Where did I even say that people should use GIMP over Photoshop???
throw_m239339 5y ago
> I just love when people demand everyone's muscle memory to be overturned in a free tool for "better UX" because they themselves are too lazy to learn a new workflow. Gimp devs probably think like you do. And this also is why artists aren't using Gimp more as well. The hubris. Gimp UI is objectively terrible and the workflow you're talking about doesn't have artists in mind, it's designed by developers for developers, not artists.
- andrewshadura 5y ago
  It's definitely not objectively terrible.
- BizarroLand 5y ago
  GIMP's UX is not objectively terrible. I use both Photoshop and GIMP and between the 2, GIMP is much easier to use for simple photo edits and manipulations. Sure, Photoshop has chops, it can do amazing stuff with ease, but I prefer GIMP's layout, it makes far more sense to me and it is quick and easy. Maybe if I had started with Photoshop I would agree with you but it does work well once you get it, and it doesn't take long to get it, and that combo is what makes for "objectively good" UX.
6510 5y ago
I know gimp reasonably well. Take those flat icons, they made it impossible to find anything. I installed it on a friends computer and now half the icons were missing. I was looking for new versions of icons unsure what they look like and unsure if they are even there. I try resize though the menu but it's different from the resize tool? There is no preview. In stead of explaining the application in 30 min I spend 30 min looking like an idiot. I accidentally detach a tool from the gui then was unable to get it back in. haha Questions like "how do I draw a box?" There are countless little weird things you have to get used to. Like, why is configure grid in the "image" menu? Why not put it under grid under "view"? I keep forgetting where it is. I do UI with simple questions like: Is the grid part of viewing or part of the image?

I just love when people demand everyone's muscle memory to be overturned in a free tool for "better UX" because they themselves are too lazy to learn a new workflow.

sippeangelo 5y ago

I can't tell if you're speaking for or against GIMP's unintuitive UX here.

kehrin 5y ago

This is exactly the attitude that made Photoshop end up with the absolute worst UX ever. So bad, I'd argue it's the reason Adobe just gave up and spread out new features across multiple other tools.

mbrodersen 5y ago
The vast majority of people prefer to pay $ for Photoshop instead of using GIMP for free. That’s how bad GIMP is.
- Woodi 5y ago
  > "vast majority" More like everyone who do anything serious with pictures.
- kehrin 5y ago
  Where did I even say that people should use GIMP over Photoshop???

throw_m239339 5y ago

> I just love when people demand everyone's muscle memory to be overturned in a free tool for "better UX" because they themselves are too lazy to learn a new workflow. Gimp devs probably think like you do. And this also is why artists aren't using Gimp more as well. The hubris. Gimp UI is objectively terrible and the workflow you're talking about doesn't have artists in mind, it's designed by developers for developers, not artists.

andrewshadura 5y ago
It's definitely not objectively terrible.
BizarroLand 5y ago
GIMP's UX is not objectively terrible. I use both Photoshop and GIMP and between the 2, GIMP is much easier to use for simple photo edits and manipulations. Sure, Photoshop has chops, it can do amazing stuff with ease, but I prefer GIMP's layout, it makes far more sense to me and it is quick and easy. Maybe if I had started with Photoshop I would agree with you but it does work well once you get it, and it doesn't take long to get it, and that combo is what makes for "objectively good" UX.

6510 5y ago

I know gimp reasonably well. Take those flat icons, they made it impossible to find anything. I installed it on a friends computer and now half the icons were missing. I was looking for new versions of icons unsure what they look like and unsure if they are even there. I try resize though the menu but it's different from the resize tool? There is no preview. In stead of explaining the application in 30 min I spend 30 min looking like an idiot. I accidentally detach a tool from the gui then was unable to get it back in. haha Questions like "how do I draw a box?" There are countless little weird things you have to get used to. Like, why is configure grid in the "image" menu? Why not put it under grid under "view"? I keep forgetting where it is. I do UI with simple questions like: Is the grid part of viewing or part of the image?