On 1/17/10, Norman Silverstone wrote:
>> > There are a few things that GIMP needs to be competitive with PS.
>> Just a few? :)
> Why is it necessary for GIMP to be competitive with PS?
You probably meant to say "competitive against PS", didn't you? :)
There is no reason why developers of free software should think in
terms of competition unless they work on a project full-time which
changes quite a lot. And yet there are many reasons why they at least
sometimes *could* think about it.
Many interesting free applications have grown from an interest in
something and further work is often largely based on motivation that
comes from user base, one way or another. A lot of projects died
simply because developers didn't receive feedback and decided the
project was useless. If you read Enselic's blog, you probably remember
that a positive review of 2.6 on Ars Technica quite motivated him to
work on 2.7 and beyond.
So a free software project is a two-way street. Hold on to that thought.
In terms of functionality GIMP has a unique position, shared
*probably* only with Artweaver. It isn't a simple editor like
Paint.net or Photofiltre, and yet it doesn't have many hi-end features
of Ps or PSP. This is actually the reason why so many users have
problems with GIMP: they expect that everything beyond Paint.Net and
the like is supposed to be on par with Ps. You don't have to like it,
btw :) It just exists.
So when it comes to GIMP users, what you are dealing with is in fact a
lot of people who see and acknowledge GIMP's potential to become a
kick-ass hi-end application, but they cannot use it for work right
now, because some important features are lacking or because the work
can be done, but in a much longer time. In some cases, like since
recently in my country, people are forced to use GIMP, because
management tells them so, because companies cannot afford Ps licenses.
Being able to do work that's in front of you, the time it takes you to
accomplish it -- these are the things people are usually quite
emotional about. And this is where demand for competition comes from,
whether you like it or not.
> As I understand it, it isn't users that GIMP wants, it is developers
> prepared to give freely of their time and expertise. If you need the
> advantages that PS has over GIMP then, by all means, buy and use PS but,
> if you want something that does what you want and is free, then use
> GIMP. If you can help to improve GIMP then good for you, if you can't
> then, as it is said, put up or shut up.
Awwww, nice! :) I've been participating in free software projects all
these years only to have someone ordering me around to shut up and use
proprietary software :) Isn't that lovely? :)
Gimp-user mailing list