4 ms·

From what I understood about GIMPs development is that they have to purposefully make things "different" from photoshop so as to not get sued. Which makes goin

From what I understood about GIMPs development is that they have to purposefully make things "different" from photoshop so as to not get sued. Which makes going from PS to GIMP incredibly painful (I too, tried a few times). I think if you come into GIMP fresh without using other tools it is probably beter. I usually ended up relying on paint.net back in the day instead of GIMP on windows tho.

timeon 3y ago
Yeah GIMP has it's issues but GP is influenced by vendor lock-in. Better example is Inkspace (because it is more comparable to closed-source alternatives): transition from Corel Draw to Inkspace is much easier then from Adobe Illustrator. I feel GP's pain, I'm in same situation ...but there are different UX/UI paradigms.
- oblio 3y ago
  > Yeah GIMP has it's issues but GP is influenced by vendor lock-in. He mentioned Krita as being better 2 paragraphs in, how does "vendor lock-in" make any sense here?
prokoudine 3y ago
> From what I understood about GIMPs development is that they have to purposefully make things "different" from photoshop so as to not get sued. I don't know how these rumours get started but that is simply not true. GIMP does some things differently and then it does some things the same (because it's just how this type of features work). And then some things were purposefully verbatim-copied from Photoshop (think Heal tool and Perspective Clone tool) because they looked like a good idea. Personally, I find it incredibly frustrating that this type of conversation always boils down to "If you are asking for explanation why copying Photoshop is good, then you are flat-out refusing to change UI and purposefully making things different".