Gimp 2.0 Pre 2 Released

What I don't like about the Gimp by ObviousGuy · 2004-01-19 12:29 · Score: 5, Insightful

Why don't they use a master window to contain all the other child Gimp windows? Every window floats free and disappears and reappears as application focus changes.

Taking a clue from Photoshop, the Gimp could be made much more user-friendly just by adding a simple window frame around all the controls and sub-windowing all the other windows.

--
I have been pwned because my /. password was too easy to guess.

Re:What I don't like about the Gimp by SchnauzerGuy · 2004-01-19 12:38 · Score: 3, Interesting

Maybe it is a (bad) design decision, or perhaps it is related to this: Adobe Sues Over Tabbed Widgets
Re:What I don't like about the Gimp by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-19 12:49 · Score: 2, Insightful

It's called MDI

Some people love it. I hate it. I think it sorta breaks the normal flow of work. Suddenly it's much harder to switch back and forth between a GIMP window and an xterm because your gimp window has to be full screen to hold all the palletes.

But, you know, it's a personal preference thing. Maybe it would be nice if they could make it an option.
Re:What I don't like about the Gimp by caseih · 2004-01-19 12:50 · Score: 4, Informative

This is in part a design decision, and partly due to the traditional nature of the gtk widget set. Essentially there is no MDI in gtk, for good or bad. Part of the solution to address this multiple window out-of-control problem is the dock idea that they've come up with. I configure gimp to just have one window (the default is 2, but you can easily rearrange it into one) that has the tool palette and all the other things I need docked to it. It's very dynamic and customizable. Sections can be added, tabs added, etc. That one window is always on top. Then my picture windows float next to it. That way I get the best of both worlds. I don't need another application to take over my entire screen like photoshop does. I prefer the windows. Except for the fact that the dock thing can only be vertical (having it horzonal at times would be nice), I think this is superior to the photoshop-style ui.

Besides that, I've always maintained that anyone who runs apps full screen (which you pretty much have to with MDI apps) really isn't using a windowing system to their best advantage. MDI is rapidly falling out of favor. MS no longer uses it for many applications and MacOS never ever did. Tabs work well for most things, although images are better off in windows. Anyway, the interface on gimp is light years ahead of the old interface! Now if only glade could get a similar interface makeover.
Re:What I don't like about the Gimp by Muggins+the+Mad · 2004-01-19 12:51 · Score: 2, Insightful

> Taking a clue from Photoshop, the Gimp could be made much more user-friendly just by adding a simple window frame around all the controls and sub-windowing all the other windows.

And that's almost exactly why I *like* the Gimp. I let my (carefully chosen to suit my needs) window manager deal with organising them.

Apps that put everything in one parent window really bug me since I have to organise *those* windows seperately from all the other apps I have running. And I can't see my other windows when I have one of the app windows in front.

- MugginsM
Re:What I don't like about the Gimp by ObviousGuy · 2004-01-19 12:53 · Score: 2, Interesting

I can see what you're getting at, but I usually switch from one app to another using keyboard shortcuts rather than hunting and clicking with the mouse. For me, the removal of the master window doesn't buy any benefits, but actually incurs a small penalty.

Making it an option would definitely be nice. Different strokes and all that.

--
I have been pwned because my /. password was too easy to guess.
Re:What I don't like about the Gimp by zsazsa · 2004-01-19 12:53 · Score: 2, Informative

Taking a clue from Photoshop, the Gimp could be made much more user-friendly just by adding a simple window frame around all the controls and sub-windowing all the other windows.

This only happens in Windows. In the Mac version of Photoshop (actually, every single Mac application that follows the UI guidelines) there is no MDI like most Windows apps.

I do feel that they should somehow reduce the number of entries that it creates in the Gnome or KDE taskbar.
Re:What I don't like about the Gimp by damiam · 2004-01-19 15:25 · Score: 2, Insightful

Essentially there is no MDI in gtk, for good or bad.
While that's true, GTK was created to serve GIMP. If they wanted MDI, they could have added it. I think the "no-MDI" thing was a conscious decision and not a toolkit limitation.

--
It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
Re:What I don't like about the Gimp by TRACK-YOUR-POSITION · 2004-01-19 15:38 · Score: 2, Insightful

My KDE 3.1.2 panel manages to group together all of the gimp windows, i'm pretty sure the latest gnome-panel is capable of that as well. sure, after you click on the single "gimp" icon, you then have to make another click to pick a gimp window--but one could imagine a window manager that remember which gimp window had focus last and then chose that one. Infact, since the window managers are already capable of grouping together single windows, it seems like it would be possible for the window manager to turn a group of windows into an MDI interface. perhaps thats why MDI was opposed, because it takes over the role of window management from the users chosen window manager? Is gimp supposed to be aware of your window manager and make sub-window frames that look like your regular subwindows?
Re:What I don't like about the Gimp by self+assembled+struc · 2004-01-19 15:47 · Score: 2, Insightful

The trick is on the Mac, even in OS 9, an open application gets only one entry in the task-list. Whether this is the application menu (mutli-finder) or the dock, photoshop appears once.

What bothers me is that every window the gimp opens takes up a new task bar location. On the Mac, it's up the application to manage it's own open windows (That's what the "window" menu is for) and many OS X apps now adhere to the cmd-~ windows-in-current-application switch key, so I cycle though my open iChat windows, or my open Photoshop documents with that key stroke, but only have one entry in my "running programs" list. Which, if you think about it makes sense. I'm running the gimp as an app. Not the individual palettes.

Also, what bothered me so much, and i'm glad to see fixed, was the use of context menus. Context menus are great for contextual items, but THE FILE MENU IS NOT A CONTEXT MENU.
Re:What I don't like about the Gimp by jonadab · 2004-01-19 15:55 · Score: 2, Informative

>Why don't they use a master window to contain all the other child Gimp windows?

Ack! That would be *horrible*. You'd be forced to maximize that big parent
window, in order to have enough space to spread out all your various Gimp
(sub)windows, but then it would block out everything behind; you could not,
for example, leave a gnome-terminal window showing through behind below your
image, so that you'd notice when your download/compile/whatever completed.

Please, don't force us into an opaque rectangle. There's no reason for such
a heinous restriction. The only conceivable justification would be, "Well,
Photoshop does it, so Gimp doesn't suck any worse than Photoshop". But even
if it was in good company, it would still suck.

--
Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
Re:What I don't like about the Gimp by Anonymous Coward · 2004-01-19 21:23 · Score: 3, Insightful

I've always maintained that anyone who runs apps full screen really isn't using a windowing system to their best advantage.

I have to disagree here. Perhaps if you have some insanely large desktop it's worth it, but at 1024x768, there simply isn't enough room to have more than one productively sized window for most applications. All you end up doing is wasting the edges of the screen real-estate and cluttering the "background". Grabbing and resizing an image window in the GIMP is noticably slower for me if there's other windows behind it with their own window decorations to distract. What I usually end up doing is shoving all my GIMP windows onto another virtual desktop to "emulate" a proper window. It still sucks, only not as much.
Re:What I don't like about the Gimp by Mr.+Slippery · 2004-01-22 17:52 · Score: 2, Insightful

Why don't they use a master window to contain all the other child Gimp windows?

Because that's an ugly and unfriendly thing to do. Let my window manager manage windows the way I want it to, please.
(If I'm doing a lot of GIMPing I'll put it on its own virtual desktop. But I might to float those GIMP windows around a web browser window to see how that image looks in the web page I'm working on.)

--
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
You cannot wash away blood with blood

Re:Is it time.. . . by BlueEar · 2004-01-19 12:48 · Score: 5, Insightful

My overall impression is that GIMP has been designed by highly qualified geeks, but geeks nevertheless. I think it would benefit immensly from a usability expert input. A number of solutions chosen is far from intuitive. While the overall capabilities of GIMP are excellent, it takes some getting-used-to time. Once the initial "who the hell thought that right click plus Ctrl is a natural solution for this operation" types of experiences are over, you might be pleasantly surprised by the power of GIMP. Overall, this is one software that I woulde definitely recomment reading books or tutorials before using it. Ah, and yes, I find that 1.3 series and now 2.0 release candidates have some improvements in usability over 1.2 version. Dockable dialogs and a much better menu systems just to name a few ...

--
A religious war is an adult version of a fight over who has the best imaginary friend

Re:Not yet for Windows... by jpsowin · 2004-01-19 12:48 · Score: 3, Informative

Since I just downloaded the pre2 release for windows and ran it, I will assume you are incorrect ;)

All you crazy Windows users an try this out (but be prepared to be dissapointed if you think it will replace p----shop) here.

Re:Is it time.. . . by njchick · 2004-01-19 12:49 · Score: 2, Informative

Actually, GIMP 2 has menubars on image windows. No need to right-click.

Re:Is it time.. . . by trouser · 2004-01-19 12:56 · Score: 2, Informative

Once you get used to the idea that you right-click on an image to perform an operation on it, it's pretty good.

The right-click drop down menu still works, but now each image also has a conventional menu at the top of the window. Makes things a lot easier.

The lack of MDI is typical of Gnome apps. Now that I'm accustomed to Gnome it doesn't bother me.

I've been using Gimp 1.3.2 for awhile. It has a lot of the features of 2.0 including the new improved interface. I think it's fantastic. Millions might disagree.

--
Now wash your hands.

Virtual desktops by myzz · 2004-01-19 17:20 · Score: 3, Informative

The is no need for MDI, when you have virtual desktops - the virtual desktop itself is the one big window, where the Gimp windows will sit. The virtual desktop solution is also more flexible - you may put some other apps windows to the same desktop as Gimp ones, when you find it useful and the Window Manager can be configured to behave as you like. Only on Windows it is useful to have one big maximized window with small ones inside it, since it doesn't have the virtual desktops.

Re:Is it time.. . . [a bit OT] by kelnos · 2004-01-19 17:38 · Score: 3, Insightful

The lack of MDI is typical of Gnome apps. Now that I'm accustomed to Gnome it doesn't bother me.

that's interesting. i guess we just have different usage patterns - i absolutely _despise_ the MDI model that apps like photoshop impose, as most of the time the only natural way to work with them is to maximise the window, thus blocking out everything else i have on that particular desktop. it's not so bad for, say, a tabbed text editor, but when you have an app like the gimp that has several ancillary windows that you need to refer to often to use the app (the main toolbox, layer window, tool options windows), you need more screen real estate to handle these items. and when they all have to be contained within a single large rectangular container, you lose the option of having a funny-shaped container which leaves open 'holes' into which you can see the rest of your desktop workspace.

i dunno, just a personal preference. but from the interface point of view, i'd pick gimp over photoshop any day. i still agree, however, that there are several aspects to the gimp UI that aren't terribly intuitive. and photoshop certainly still has an edge in features (tho not being a graphics-savvy person, the gimp is more than sufficient for my needs).

--
Xfce: Lighter than some, heavier than others. Just right.

Two editing styles by digitect · 2004-01-19 18:21 · Score: 3, Insightful

As I sit here reading comments, I'm struck by the two conflicting desires of the posters:

MDI v. window manager
Window mouse-clicking/virtual workspace-swapping v. Alt+Tab/Window list mouse-clicking

Perhaps we're using GIMP two different ways.

It appears those that do not want MDI want to be able to arrange their windows around the desktop leaving little areas to peer through to other apps in the background. This group likes to use the mouse to focus windows and may enjoy being able to swap to another workspace to preserve this environment.

Others of us (myself included) sometimes do graphics professionally for days straight at a time. We're in the environment 10-12 hours and may have 20-50 image windows open in one session, maybe 500 a day. (Such as when producing icons, or bullets, or thumbnails, etc.) In this case, having to select objects by visual means is almost impossible. There are enough windows to completely obstruct the background with frames alone. And who on earth would actually go to the trouble to physically arrange them all?! Instead, we prefer a single Alt+Tab or mouse click on the window list to switch away, and another to return to the graphic application environment. The MDI has it's own window list which aids in having to decide between different names and other applications in the same list. It also has its own separate Ctrl+Tab key combination to page between them.

I guess I'm tired of seeing the flames. Can't the developers simply acknowldege that there is more than one way to look at the UI and add the simple option to have MDI? Or is it really not that simple? Perhaps not. Is that why the option is being avoided?

--
There is no need to use a SlashDot sig for SEO...

Re:Two editing styles by IamTheRealMike · 2004-01-20 01:54 · Score: 3, Informative

I guess I'm tired of seeing the flames. Can't the developers simply acknowldege that there is more than one way to look at the UI and add the simple option to have MDI? Or is it really not that simple? Perhaps not. Is that why the option is being avoided?
Your problem is solved by virtual desktops. MDI is not supported by most windowing systems that Gimp is run on (X, Quartz) .. in fact only Win32 does support it. MDI is a hack that doesn't allow you to use standard windowing widgets like the window list to switch between them. It's hard to implement. It's a limitless source of bugs. It's got terrible usability - even Microsoft doesn't use it anymore.
In short, if you want to have many windows open at once and manage them all, use virtual desktops - use many of them, if you like. Have each image you are working with on a different desktop. I've done this and found it works nicely, much better than MDI ever did.

The improvements just keep coming... by alan_dershowitz · 2004-01-19 18:43 · Score: 2, Interesting

The GIMP just keeps getting better and better. I think this is great for open source, and for the thousands of people who need a really good graphics tool but don't want to chuck out the money for Photoshop.

But to head all the photoshop comparisons off at the pass...Don't assume that most people who already use photoshop even care. They've got a time and education investment. Their tool is literally 100% supported in their profession. It does almost everything they need, and has near perfect interoperability with other industry tools. You are hired based on how well you know photoshop.

I haven't done any graphic design since college, but I still know all the people I went to school with. Not a single one has the slightest professional interest in a new tool. Before anyone takes this as a troll, I'll say that the number of people I know who AREN'T paid professionals far exceed the ones who are, and every one of them was interested in a free photoshop-like tool.

I'm slightly worried about people labelling this as flamebait, but its fairly frustrating when you look around and see people talking about how its just a matter of time before GIMP swats photoshop out of the air. To me, thats kind of akin to saying that gravity is going to reverse itself tomorrow--simply too much has to change overnight for me to buy that.

(as a side note, does anyone use GIMP with a Wacom pad in Xfree86? Do all the basic tools and plugins take advantage of tilt and pressure? I can't find any user experiences with this on the net, and I'd like to know before I recompile X for pad support, and actually dig the thing out of the attic.)

Re:The improvements just keep coming... by psergiu · 2004-01-20 00:34 · Score: 2, Insightful

> as a side note, does anyone use GIMP with a Wacom pad in Xfree86?

yes. :)

> Do all the basic tools and plugins take advantage of tilt and pressure?

Yes - but as my cheapo wacom is only presure sersitive - i cannot comment on the tilt.

--
1% APY, No fees, Online Bank https://captl1.co/2uIErYq Don't let your $$$ sit in a no-interest acct.

Re:Is it time.. . . [a bit OT] by elveu · 2004-01-19 20:35 · Score: 2, Insightful

the advantage of the "holes" is that it allows you to have other applications visable in the background and offers far more flexability. just beceause you personally may not have a use for it dosn't mean that there isn't one.
and most people who use image editors dosn't do graphics proressionally

It's getting there! by Larry+David · 2004-01-20 13:41 · Score: 2, Interesting

Fact 1) I've been using Photoshop since version 3, or for about eight years. It took at least five years for me to consider myself a 'master' of it, and yet I still learn tricks from people. So, I love Photoshop. It's really a rock.

Fact 2) I used Gimp a couple of years ago, and hated it.

Now forward to the present day.. these screenshots look EXCELLENT. Finally it looks like we're going places. The open source thing is paying off, and I can see some regular designers using this stuff in a year or two. Unrelated to geeks, but related to designers, Linux in these screenshots is actually beginning to look pretty sharp! I mean, this is no Mac OS X yet, or not even a Photoshop, but it's GETTING THERE.

What I don't get is why GNOME is so wasteful on toolbars. Why can't the menu for Gimp be on that top bar, where it says 'Actions'? Since all the tasks are on the bottom bar, it appears the top bar is kinda useless. Anyone?

Wacom support by djeca · 2004-01-20 22:23 · Score: 2, Informative

If X supports your pad, the Gimp supports it.

I've had great success (for my needs) with a Wacom PenPartner (well, until it broke and turned into an expensive mousepad :() and all the Gimp tools recognise tilt and pressure where appropriate.

26 of 67 comments (clear)