Vendor lock-in is bad and Adobe’s business practices are bad, no matter how you cook it. There are so many viable alternatives to Adobe stuff.
Problem is, Photoshop power users don’t often want to hear about any alternatives. GIMP is just one of the most popular culprits in this regard. That’s exactly the kind of mindset that the vendor lock-in creates.
I’m kind of happy that I stuck with GIMP when I was younger. Now, I have absolutely no fear of trying out any software that comes my way. I do most of my photo work in Affinity Photo. Don’t have problems with GIMP either, use it for some other stuff.
The only way to get people to switch from Adobe is to wait for Adobe to make the life unbearable for their own customers. Some time ago there was a huge movement for people to switch from Premiere to DaVinci Resolve because Premiere really is pretty horrible these days.
The only way to get people to switch from Adobe is to wait for Adobe to make the life unbearable for their own customers
Completely agree with this! The big opportunities to get mindshare will come completely out of the blue, and likely as a result of massive blunders on Adobe’s side.
We never know when the blunders will come, we just have to be ready and provide the next best user experience so that the free software is the “obvious” place to switch to.
As we saw from the twitter/reddit migrations, the fediverse did get a large amount of traction, but bluesky became the obvious alternative because its UI was basically the same.
And that’s fine - the fediverse is it’s own thing and many people (myself included) don’t want “adoption at all costs” - but I think it’s worth pointing out that it does hinder adoption in these big moments.
I have a lot of respect for free software projects that deliberately replicate the UI of an existing proprietary project. They make it so easy to recommend for people to switch when those moments come.
What I have seen is that once people get a taste of free software that really easily solves their problem, it makes the benefits “real” to them and they start to look for other alternatives on their own.
So far hundreds of people are saying exactly what you do. “It’s just better, OK, shut up, I will not elaborate”.
And yeah, obviously, it’s not your job to do anything for an anonymous commenter on the internet, but you have spent the same amount of time telling us that you don’t want to provide examples, than you could just giving us two or three, and that’s not not saying something.
I doubt that to be a serious concern for companies. Especially with how marketing regularly revolves around sexualizing their messages and how things like hostesses are a thing at many trade-fairs. The CEO of NVIDIA signed a boob ffs.
Also the only time i came across the term gimp was in Pulp Fiction. If it wasn’t for that movie i wouldn’t know that it has something to do with BDSM.
But really, what are things why GIMP is rationally not suitable for industry work? Is it a lack of certain features? Is it performance? Is it an impossible to learn UI? Because in your other reply all i read was that people who are used to PS just stick with it, because that is what they are used to. Which then brings us to exactly what the meme is criticizing.
And at the monthly pricing of Adobe that switching costs only justify themselves for so long. Also a friend of mine who does photo and video stuff for weddings and events as a side-gig has been furious how having to have Win11 to use Adobe cost him 5k because his old computer was not compatible anymore.
So i am curious to understand, if there is rational reasons, why taking the shit from Adobe is worth it. Of course if certain standard workflows take 1 minute in PS and 2 minutes in GIMP that adds up over a full time job. On the other hand if professional users were to support the open source development, these issues could be addressed, creating value for everyone except Adobe.
deleted by creator
Vendor lock-in is bad and Adobe’s business practices are bad, no matter how you cook it. There are so many viable alternatives to Adobe stuff.
Problem is, Photoshop power users don’t often want to hear about any alternatives. GIMP is just one of the most popular culprits in this regard. That’s exactly the kind of mindset that the vendor lock-in creates.
I’m kind of happy that I stuck with GIMP when I was younger. Now, I have absolutely no fear of trying out any software that comes my way. I do most of my photo work in Affinity Photo. Don’t have problems with GIMP either, use it for some other stuff.
The only way to get people to switch from Adobe is to wait for Adobe to make the life unbearable for their own customers. Some time ago there was a huge movement for people to switch from Premiere to DaVinci Resolve because Premiere really is pretty horrible these days.
Completely agree with this! The big opportunities to get mindshare will come completely out of the blue, and likely as a result of massive blunders on Adobe’s side.
We never know when the blunders will come, we just have to be ready and provide the next best user experience so that the free software is the “obvious” place to switch to.
As we saw from the twitter/reddit migrations, the fediverse did get a large amount of traction, but bluesky became the obvious alternative because its UI was basically the same.
And that’s fine - the fediverse is it’s own thing and many people (myself included) don’t want “adoption at all costs” - but I think it’s worth pointing out that it does hinder adoption in these big moments.
I have a lot of respect for free software projects that deliberately replicate the UI of an existing proprietary project. They make it so easy to recommend for people to switch when those moments come.
What I have seen is that once people get a taste of free software that really easily solves their problem, it makes the benefits “real” to them and they start to look for other alternatives on their own.
deleted by creator
I don’t do graphic design and only use GIMP for making memes. Could you give a few pointers, why GIMP is not usable compared to photoshop?
there was a case to be made in the past [nondestructive editing, cmyk etc], but as of 3.0(.2) the divide is steadily narrowing
deleted by creator
If you wanted to give counterexamples to your point, you couldn’t come up with a better one.
deleted by creator
So far hundreds of people are saying exactly what you do. “It’s just better, OK, shut up, I will not elaborate”.
And yeah, obviously, it’s not your job to do anything for an anonymous commenter on the internet, but you have spent the same amount of time telling us that you don’t want to provide examples, than you could just giving us two or three, and that’s not not saying something.
Damn this might be the fakest reason I’ve ever heard to not support GIMP
I doubt that to be a serious concern for companies. Especially with how marketing regularly revolves around sexualizing their messages and how things like hostesses are a thing at many trade-fairs. The CEO of NVIDIA signed a boob ffs.
Also the only time i came across the term gimp was in Pulp Fiction. If it wasn’t for that movie i wouldn’t know that it has something to do with BDSM.
But really, what are things why GIMP is rationally not suitable for industry work? Is it a lack of certain features? Is it performance? Is it an impossible to learn UI? Because in your other reply all i read was that people who are used to PS just stick with it, because that is what they are used to. Which then brings us to exactly what the meme is criticizing.
And at the monthly pricing of Adobe that switching costs only justify themselves for so long. Also a friend of mine who does photo and video stuff for weddings and events as a side-gig has been furious how having to have Win11 to use Adobe cost him 5k because his old computer was not compatible anymore.
So i am curious to understand, if there is rational reasons, why taking the shit from Adobe is worth it. Of course if certain standard workflows take 1 minute in PS and 2 minutes in GIMP that adds up over a full time job. On the other hand if professional users were to support the open source development, these issues could be addressed, creating value for everyone except Adobe.
Docker Engine, without the Docker Desktop licensing and VM overhead
Docker is a great example because podman basically is a drop in replacement.