[kazinator]

Traditional free software developers do not use the most convenient program without caring about freedom.

Otherwise, for instance, nobody would be debugging with gdb, rather than Visual Studio or what have you.Nobody would be LaTeXing instead of using MS Word or Adobe Illustrator.

GIMP isn't as good as Photoshop (if I believe what people say), yet people still use it. (I've only ever used GIMP since 1996; I have no idea about Photoshop and don't care; it's not free, won't use it.)

People went through all sorts of inconveniences to use free software, like manually figuring out monitor clock timings to stick into their X configuration, building their own custom kernels and whatnot.

You can't say "convenience wins" with a straight face; that's like saying free software doesn't exist.

[romwell]

>Nobody would be LaTeXing instead of using MS Word or Adobe Illustrator.

Hahaha. Have you tried to write a piece of mathematics in MS Word? I did. It's a torture I wouldn't wish on anyone I know.

Mathematicians are all about convenience; so much so that proprietary LaTeX Editors were quite popular before FOSS caught up (remember WinEdt?).

But LaTeX itself - it's the most convenient tool to write and share mathematics that's ever been made. It's unsurpassed. It's required if you want to publish, because all the journals use LaTeX, and most math books are made with LaTeX.

It's so good that people will literally think you are an idiot if you are not using it[1] and won't believe your results.

And ArXiV, have you heard of ArXiV? No LaTeX, no ArXiV.

And trust me, most mathematicians don't care much about FOSS. But they care about not spending too much effort on making their results presentable and shareable. LaTeX -> PDF is the path of least resistance.

[1]https://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=304

[magduf]

>Otherwise, for instance, nobody would be debugging with gdb, rather than Visual Studio or what have you.

If you're working with embedded Linux, Visual Studio isn't going to be much help for debugging on a target.

>Nobody would be LaTeXing instead of using MS Word or Adobe Illustrator.

LaTeX does some things much better than Word, and Illustrator is very expensive.

>GIMP isn't as good as Photoshop (if I believe what people say), yet people still use it.

GIMP is free. Photoshop is not.

You seem to be assuming the people have unlimited money to purchase software licenses. Many free software programs are used not because they're better, but just because they're free and good enough. If I just want to crop and rescale some photos or something, why on earth would I buy a Photoshop license when I can just download and use GIMP for free?

[kazinator]

Many proprietary programs also get used because they are good enough. Not everyone wants to do a simple thing using some UI that has grown into a Boeing 747 cockpit.

Some Windows users use neither GIMP nor Photoshop to crop an image, but rather MS Paint, which is comes with the OS, so it is "no additional cost", and requires next to no training to use.

MS Paint has vastly diminished functionality compared to either GIMP or Photoshop.

[magduf]

Maybe cropping wasn't the best example for me to use, but there are many people who want to do more advanced photo editing than that (which is beyond the capabilities of MS Paint), but do not want to pay $$$ for Photoshop. Those people frequently use GIMP, simply because it's free and it works well enough.

[thrower123]

> nobody would be debugging with gdb, rather than Visual Studio

If Visual Studio ran on Linux, would anybody bother with gdb? Currently, the second-highest voted UserVoice issue for Visual Studio is people asking for a Linux version (and rather hilariously not understanding what a colossal rewrite that would entail...)

https://visualstudio.uservoice.com/forums/121579-visual-stud...

> Nobody would be LaTeXing instead of using MS Word or Adobe Illustrator.

LaTeX might just be easier than trying to typeset something reliably in Word. I know I always wrote in plain-text and then did a final pass to paste and format it into Word immediately before printing.

> GIMP isn't as good as Photoshop (if I believe what people say), yet people still use it.

Photoshop is stupidly expensive still, and cracking software has fallen out of favor

[kazinator]

> second-highest voted UserVoice issue for Visual Studio is people asking for a Linux version

How many of these users are long time free software developers, though, who did free software long before it could just be a reluctant aspect of a job you land into?

[keithnz]

Interestingly enough Visual Studio now supports cross platform debugging ( you still need Visual Studio running on windows, but it can debug a linux based program )

[kazinator]

A variant called Embedded Visual Studio already supported cross debugging of Windows CE targets twenty years ago. (I was there and used it). Maybe that's not quite cross-platform, but kind of half-way.

[Drdrdrq]

I don't think a few of us using Gimp (yes, I am an occassional user) will stand in the way of convenience winning. Hige majority of people do (and will) use Photoshop, simply because it meets their needs better.

[floatboth]

GIMP certainly wins on convenience: you just download it, no credit cards or shady torrents.

[kazinator]

> it meets their needs better.

That's hardly the case; they are not even aware of the existence of alternatives.

Most of people's occasional image fix-up needs could be met just by MS Paint, which they would find easier to use. Problem is, they don't even know that exists and that they have it pre-installed, let alone that GIMP exists.

[beanland]

A quick Google search for cheap/free Photoshop alternatives will usually get people to GIMP in a couple of clicks. Why are you saying that Photoshop users are unaware of any alternatives? It seems logical to me that anyone in the market for this kind of software would be interested in saving some money before shelling out for PS. Am I wrong?

[zapzupnz]

> For instance, nobody would be debugging with gdb

I mean, I debug with lldb which is free and open. Sure, I do the debugging through the non-free(-as-in-freedom), non-open Xcode, but that's because Xcode lets me harness the power of lldb in a manner that suits me.

There's nothing stopping free and open software projects from being delivered in a user-friendly manner. I'm sure there are plenty of people using gdb and lldb with fully-free and fully-open editors and IDEs.

Sometimes it just takes a mindset adjustment to see that what is most often considered inconvenient, and that followers of free software doctrines must begrudgingly accept as their lot, can actually be delivered in a user-friendly manner that meets the proprietary-software-users' expectations.