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 wo
by 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 agoIt's definitely not objectively terrible.
- BizarroLand 5y agoGIMP'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.