Maybe Gimp has one of the worst UI/UX ever made? I still stand by my theory that gimp was made as a troll program to see how far people will defend opensource no matter how objectively bad it is to use.
As somebody who uses Photoshop for a living, I prefer the GIMP. The GIMP falls down on a few major features, not on usability. I can also see how Photoshop as the standard has broken people's brains so much that the concept of "intuitive" becomes entirely lost. It's not as bad as Illustrator, but features are just randomly thrown everywhere; the only reason I'm fast at it is from hard-won experience.
It's impossible to paint "Image -> Crop to Selection" as hard to find. The menu is at the same place it is in almost every other program one uses, at the top of the window.
I've never used Photoshop and gimp confuses the hell out of me. I installed krita a year ago for my simple editing tasks and never once had to search online for 'how do I....'
I've used all three, and the amount of searching from least to most goes Krita -> PS -> GIMP for me.
PS was the first I used, but I still had to search things for the entire time I used it. GIMP I just start by looking up how to do something, and Krita I just do it.
As someone who never used Photoshop before I find Gimp's UI functional and nothing worth complaining about. Especially I like the MDI interface with each widget being a seperate window.
It's been a long time, but when I was in high school I chose to use the GIMP rather than Photoshop for my photo class, which was the first time I used any photo editing software. I found it to be more or less fine.
It's impossible to paint "Image -> Crop to Selection" as hard to find. The menu is at the same place it is in almost every other program one uses, at the top of the window.