[lukan]

"The only difference from GIMP or Photoshop is that the UI/UX has a different efficiency metric (mainly because interactive image manipulation is more efficient when you are interacting visually). But the operations are just as discoverable"

I know. Which is why the year of the linux desktop was such a success.

"Why does it matter to the person who makes their solution available that the common people won't?"

They have all the right not to care, but it still is not helping the goal of being useful for normal people.

[lelanthran]

> They have all the right not to care, but it still is not helping the goal of being useful for normal people.

That isn't the goal. I don't know why you keep saying that.

[lukan]

I know it isn't for you, but it is for me. The question here is, how is it for GNU in general. I understood the original point in a way, that it is.

[lelanthran]

> I know it isn't for you, but it is for me.

Maybe, but your goal is irrelevant to the authors of the GPL.

> The question here is, how is it for GNU in general.

The goal for the FSF and their GPL is, and always was, freedom for the user of the software.

Ease-of-use was never an important consideration, much less a goal. This whole discussion from you in this thread is bizarre, TBH. You are projecting your goals onto the FSF's GPL, and judging it to be a failure based on your goals.

Your goals are irrelevant to them, just as their goals appear to be irrelevant to you.