"Martin Nordholts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

>    As I think usability (or rather a lack of it) is the main obstacle for
>    people to migrate to freely availible software, wouldn't implementing
>    the GIMP interface identicly to the market leading Adobe PS be the
>    best thing to do?

The user interface of Photoshop has the same problem that GIMP's user
interface has: It has not been designed but it is grown into what it
is today. In that aspect the Photoshop user interface is definitely
worse than GIMP. We have at least done some restructuring over the
last releases (and quite a few more in the current development cycle).

>    By having an identical interface, more people could migrate, more
>    people would help on development, and everything would become better.

GIMP does not attempt to be Photoshop nor to be like Photoshop. We do
not believe that Photoshop has a user interface that is worth to be
copied. That doesn't mean that we think that the current GIMP user
interface can't be improved or should not be improved. It just means
that we think that any user interface change should be made by looking
at use cases and by checking how we can improve our user's workflows,
not by copying from some other program.

>    Well, in this particular case, I would just encourage to rename
>    'Xtns' to 'Extensions'.

The problem here is that the toolbox is rather small and if we renamed
the menu as you suggested, that would push the Help menu off the
window. Of course you aren't the first one who has brought this up.
The general consensus here seems to be that we want to get rid of the
toolbox menu in the long run.

Gimp-developer mailing list

Reply via email to