[plug] Gimpshop - Good or Bad

[Craig Ringer]

On Fri, 2005-04-01 at 13:47 +0800, Carl Gherardi wrote:

> The most common complaint about gimp is its user interface for new
> users which is "not intuitive"

I always find that fasciating. I have users here who were introduced to
both apps at the same time, having never used graphics software before.
They seem to deal equally well with both - that is to say they find both
hideously complicated, hard to understand, and hard to navigate.

My personal view is that _experienced_ _photoshop_ _users_ don't like
the GIMP's interface because it's not what they're used to. Mac users
generally hate Photoshop/win's MDI and Windows users generally hate Mac
photoshop's individual windows and floating palettes for much the same
reason.

> I assume Adobe has spent the time and research in usability to make
> their interface both user friendly and useful to power users.

The interface is pretty usable considering the incredible complexity of
the program, yes. I think they've done a pretty good job.

I actually think the GIMP 2.x does a rather good job too, my only real
complaint being the layout of the menus (I find it hard to find the
right palettes in the menus) and the fact there's no quickmask button in
the main palette.

> It would
> seem to me that making the gimp interface resemble photoshop is a good
> thing, the only negative comments being the "open source cant 
> innovate only clone".

It's certainly a good thing from the PoV of existing Photoshop,
PaintShop Pro etc users ;-)

The current GIMP UI is also somewhat odd in the modern world - you don't
seem many apps driven by context menus. That alone might be an issue,
simply because it can be somewhat offputting initially.

> What does gimp do better than photoshop with regards to interface?

I haven't noticed anything that struck me as significantly better
personally. I strongly prefer Photoshop, but that's what I learned on
and what I'm comfortable with.

--
Craig Ringer