[mbylstra]

Single window mode is definitely the step in the right direction towards what I think GIMP should be doing: ripping off Photoshop wholesale. Perhaps GIMP has some features that are arguably better than Photoshop, but the problem is that a huge number of people are very used to Photoshop's interface. Just about everyone has messed about with Photoshop at some point either professionally or just for fun (be it legally or illegally) and Photoshop's interface (for better or worse) has become second nature. I would actually argue that the lack of a familiar Photoshop alternative is holding back mainstream adoption of Linux. Open Office or Libre Office are good enough replacements for most people (and they have obviously gone for the wholesale rip off tactic) but GIMP just does not suffice - the main thing being the interface, not lack of features.

There are really simple things that could be done like making the toolbar the same as photoshop's. I mean it's great that you can resize however you like, but having it unresizable makes it easy to remember the button layout and instinctively grab for a tool. The fact that completely different symbols are used for the same actions does not help. eg: knife is crop in GIMP and slice in photoshop.

Once Linux/GIMP has achieved good market share over mac/photoshop then it's time to start thinking about improving the photo/vector publishing paradigm and boy is there much remove for improvement. Adobe has pretty much had the monopoly on 2D graphic design tools for the last couple of decades. With almost no competitors - what incentive is there to truly innovate? I mean compare the sophistication of something like 3D studio max or Maya compared to illustrator. (3D being an area where stiff competition still remains) Why is Photoshop and Illustrator even two completely separate pieces of software? because they can sell two things separately for a combined total price greater than one?

[melling]

I'm a developer and I desperately want to learn how to design. I gave up on the GIMP and bought Photoshop simply because there are so many more resources (PSD's, tutorials, blogs, videos, etc). Occasionally I pull up the GIMP, but quite honestly there aren't enough hours in the day.

I get the feeling that the GIMP devs wants to be "better" than Photoshop, but the steering wheel, and gas and brake pedals are where they are in a car; it's all about muscle memory. Making it easier for Photoshop users to fire up the GIMP for quick projects will do more to promote the GIMP than being 2x better than Photoshop.

[nicubunu]

a verbatim copy of the Photoshop UI is a lawsuit waiting to happen. and Photoshop is not the paradigm of UI design, is just something a lot of people know how to use.

[kijin]

It doesn't even need to be a verbatim copy, just give users a similar workflow. Just like LibreOffice gives you a similar workflow to MS Office 2003.

[nodata]

A much better workflow would be even better.

[angersock]

Wrong in one. That type of thinking is why the GIMP has been a painful program to use.

Don't let the best be the enemy of the good.

[nodata]

> Wrong in one

(I don't like these quick put downs, they imply a finality that doesn't exist)

That The Gimp has been unsuccessful with a different interface to Photoshop does not mean a different interface could not be successful.

Imagine that an amazing new interface was developed that was so much better than what any product has now. Everyone asks why this has not been thought of before. Now imagine that it belongs to version 3.0 of The Gimp.

Just because one alternative interface didn't work, doesn't mean we should all give up and use the same interface. With that advice, nobody would ever try anything new.

[angersock]

Replied to above.

[nicubunu]

that's not what the grandparent poster said, let me quote "what I think GIMP should be doing: ripping off Photoshop wholesale." - that would be a BAD thing