Slashdot Mirror


GIMP 2.8 Will Sport a Redesigned UI

ceswiedler writes "Ars Technica's Ryan Paul previews the upcoming release of the GIMP. It will include a single-window mode where the user can dock toolbar windows and switch between images via tabs. There are other improvements as well, including docking support in multi-window mode and improvements to the text tool." To get this early preview, Paul compiled version 2.7.1 from the active development branch, along with its dependencies.

18 of 401 comments (clear)

  1. Smartest workflow move ....ever! by MindPrison · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm glad they're doing this.

    It makes it much easier to work on the images, instead of having to "mishap-click" on every single window, and having to click on the related window in order to get back into the image editor again. WAAAAY overdue, but finally here - good job guys!

    --
    What this world is coming to - is for you and me to decide.
    1. Re:Smartest workflow move ....ever! by Lord+Lode · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, the makers of a painting program should not say "use window manager X or Y". The makers of a painting program should ensure that their program works in a reasonable way on the system the user has.

      User-friendlyness, you know?

    2. Re:Smartest workflow move ....ever! by Scutter · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So now they're screwing up a totally fine UI and degenerate into the train wreck that's Photoshop. Nice.

      I agree! How dare they give you the option to have a single-window mode that's turned off by default! Jerks!

      --

      "Tell me doctor, with all of your defenses, are there any provisions for an attack by killer bees?"
    3. Re:Smartest workflow move ....ever! by daid303 · · Score: 4, Informative

      It is possible, take a look at inkscape: http://www.inkscape.org/

      Using inkscape was a great shock to me, it was usable out of the box, with 0 tutorials! A real usable open source image application. It should be the flagship of FOSS development IMHO.

      It's not the single window/multi window that makes GIMP bad. It's the GIMP UI that makes GIMP bad. Every time I tried to use it it found myself fighting the UI. Not a single feature was easy to use, no single element reacts as you expect.
      I only know 1 worse offender, Blender. Which just mocks you with it's UI.

    4. Re:Smartest workflow move ....ever! by WWWWolf · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, the makers of a painting program should not say "use window manager X or Y".

      They're not really saying "use window manager X or Y". They were saying "use any window manager you want as long as it supports feature X or Y" - a far more reasonable request.

      Having simple pieces that all take responsibility of their own area is the *nix way; if managing windows is hard, that's not the application's fault, it's the window manager's fault. Why fix one application when you can fix all of the applications at once?

      Now they're saying "since so many of you refuse to use a window manager that works, we're doing a workaround..." and then add, "but you could - you know - save time by using the current version with a window manager that's not broken. Just saying."

    5. Re:Smartest workflow move ....ever! by IntlHarvester · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Focus-follows-mouse made no sense back in the old days with Solaris work stations. It still makes no sense.

      It made sense for the stereotypical bearded Unix guy with nothing but 8 different XTerms open on his gigantic Sun monitor. None of his software used a mouse for input, so why not use it as an enhanced 2-dimensional task switcher?

      --
      Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
    6. Re:Smartest workflow move ....ever! by elrous0 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If you think Photoshop is "luddite" compared to GIMP, you are truly a deluded soul. According to the review, you couldn't even type text directly onto an image until this new build. Do you realize how basic a feature that is? That doesn't suggest a program that's way ahead of Photoshop to me--it suggests a program that's way behind.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    7. Re:Smartest workflow move ....ever! by SpooForBrains · · Score: 4, Interesting

      That's all very well and good, but a window manager that's broken covers:

      KDE
      GNOME (I believe - I've never used it in anger myself)
      Windows
      and probably MANY more, if not most. So, a significant proportion of the potential user-base.

      Yes, some of these can be configured to work the way the developers require for sensible functioning of their app.

      Also, this does not address the problem of having to use GIMP with multiple workspaces/desktops, whereby "Send to desktop n" will send the image you're working on, but none of the toolbars or dialogs associated with working on that image. This was my second biggest bugbear of using GIMP (the first, obviously, being the absurdly steep learning curve).

      --
      "The dew has clearly fallen with a particularly sickening thud this morning"
    8. Re:Smartest workflow move ....ever! by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They were saying "use any window manager you want as long as it supports feature X or Y" - a far more reasonable request.

      What if feature X or Y drives the user fricking insane?

      The first time I used a Unix workstation 20 years ago, I was appalled by the focus-follows-mouse misfeature. It turns moving your mouse into navigating a minefield. Luckily, more sane desktop environments have been developed in the decades since.

      I will never, ever enable focus-follows mouse. Nor will the vast majority of the population. I would switch to Microsoft Windows rather than suffer such abuse from a window manager. So the request is *not* reasonable.

    9. Re:Smartest workflow move ....ever! by GooberToo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I was appalled by the focus-follows-mouse misfeature.

      Oddly, what you're calling a misfeature is what many would call click-to-focus. Click to focus needless requires extra clicking. Now do keep in mind there is a difference between raise on focus and focus follows mouse. I hate raise on focus but focus follows mouse is extremely superior to click-to-focus. Why? Because click-to-focus needlessly forces you to waste screen real estate when referencing one screen and inputting on another. This is even more so as you continue to add more and more references screens.

      Like many technology related issues, many times is a case of what's different is bad or ugly. You were likely taught to use a computer with click-to-focus and therefore anything which is not that is bad. But once you get used to it, the click-to-focus style of using interfaces, assuming the interface is designed to work with it (*cough* no windows *cough*), anything else sucks and sucks badly.

      So if you enjoy needlessly clicking for the sake of needlessly clicking, then by all means continue to use click-to-focus. But for those of us that enjoy fewer clicks and higher efficiency of interface, you'll not want to go back to the insanity which is click-to-focus.

      I guess if you're one of those users who maximizes every window and never multi-tasks, then there is nothing wrong with click-to-focus. But if not, you need to give it a try for a week or two and you'll be wondering what the heck you were thinking. Of course, this assumes you're not using Windows, which is specifically designed to break focus follows mouse behavior. There, its usable but IMO, a wash because of Windows' UI behaviors.

  2. Looks good by srussia · · Score: 5, Funny

    But some of the screenshots look Photoshopped.

    --
    Set your phasers on "funky"!
  3. "... Two Steps Back" by onetruedabe · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Are they still committed to breaking one of Gimp's best features: "Intelligent Save" ? (Inferring file type based on extension)

    Splitting "File > Export" and "File > Save" is counter-intuitive; it's not DWIMish, and I guarantee more people will be frustrated that the Save dialog box is "broken" when they try to save a JPG and end up with an XCF file instead. "File > Export" reeks of being Designed By Developers, rather than actually taking user behavior into account.

    (And stealing the keystroke for "Fit In Window" is just adding insult to injury...)

  4. Re:I really hate the GIMP UI changes. by Ivan+Stepaniuk · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The fact that you use focus-follows-mouse notes that you have a very special taste regarding GUI. Photoshop changed too, more or less in the same direction (less little windows floating all over)

    --
    My other signature is a car
  5. Much more important features missing by syousef · · Score: 4, Informative

    GIMP is always compared to photoshop. There are some key features missing in GIMP that do not allow serious artists to move to it from Photoshop. Three of these are adjustment layers (which GEGL is suppose to eventually bring about, but it's been a long wait), proper 16 and 32 bit image editing and LAB and CYMK modes. (GIMP only does RGB). I'm greatful for GIMP and thankful for the developer's efforts but I'd rather they focus on these things than dicking around with windowing. The truth is once you get use to it, GIMP's windowing isn't THAT bad.

    --
    These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
  6. Who cares about UI, but 16 bit per color... by tapanitarvainen · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Me, I don't care much about the UI - I'll get used to whatever way it goes. The significant change, to me, is left at the very end of the article: GEGL and proper high-bit-depth color support it brings.

  7. Forget the UI, change the name by Culture20 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yes, this is *that* post. Just trying to keep it fresh in your mind. I use the GNU Image Manipulation Program all the time, and internally, I call it GIMP, and amongst friends in the know, I call it GIMP, but amongst people who are new to FOSS, I usually make an effort to use the full name. Every once in a while, I forget, and most people associate GIMP or "The GIMP" with Pulp Fiction these days, or worse, they've never seen Pulp Fiction because they would be offended by it, but they still know "The GIMP" through cultural allusions to that character, and thus are offended by any reference to GIMP.

    Hell, I'd even take GIMPY (the GNU Image Manipulation Program for You), since that evokes a different, albeit still negative, emotional response.

    The best suggestion I've heard is just drop GNU or make GNU separate from the acronym: IMP, GNU IMP.

    1. Re:Forget the UI, change the name by domatic · · Score: 4, Funny

      Let me make some suggestions then:

      Professional Image Manipulation Program
      Streamlined Image Manipulation Program
      Windowed Image Manipulation Program
      Lightspeed Image Manipulation Program

      I would think all the pros would just leap at the change to PIMP their graphics.

  8. GIMP and GTK+ are holding back open source UIs by rabiddeity · · Score: 5, Informative

    So in other words they're being smug assholes to people who use one OS versus another.

    Classy.

    And the reasons for this are political, with a side of history. The GIMP developers invented GTK+, and now they're tied to it.

    Know what? GTK+ is great under X11. It looks and behaves like crap under everything else, regardless of what theme you select. Basic UI principles say that your applications should be consistent with the OS, and that means using standard widgets (menu bars, icons, buttons, file open dialogs, and other things that match the look and feel of your OS). When GIMP was first released there WERE no standard widgets for Linux, so the devs hacked some together and released them as a separate library. A couple other devs saw the work that had been done, and figured that GTK could be used to save work on their own projects, and before long a ton of apps and window managers used it. Some of those app developers wanted to port their apps to Windows and Mac OS, and so GTK+ was ported as well. But because GTK+ manually renders all the buttons and widgets and so on, the ports look out of place. Strike that. They look godawful. Really this isn't GTK's fault, it's just not the right tool for the job. It's not just that they look bad, but users have to learn things like how to interact with a new file manager. It's unprofessional, it robs the user of time and effort, and it makes ported open source software seem inferior to native apps.

    Recognizing the inherent problem, several other developers made toolkits so that apps would look normal again. A wxWidgets program compiled for Linux uses GTK+ to draw the dialogs and menus, but calls the native widget functions under Windows. The result is a program that looks like it was designed specifically for each OS on which it runs. Take a look at screenshots of Audacity for a great example.

    They could design the UI in wxWidgets or Qt to make it actually look decent under every OS, but they won't-- and really at this point they can't, because the former would be seen as pandering, and the latter would be seen as abandoning GTK+. But to everyone outside the community, it looks like the GIMP devs are rallying to prove the superiority of GTK+ using the flagship Linux graphics app, at the expense of the open source movement. It only pisses off those of us who are trying to ease migrations to a free OS by gradually replacing existing non-free apps with free alternatives like OpenOffice. OO is a drop in replacement for MS Office in many cases, and behaves almost exactly like a native app under Windows. On the other hand, Inkscape is a great program with a decent UI, but I can't wholeheartedly recommend it as an Illustrator replacement to Windows users because it doesn't look or act like what they're used to. And if I can't get my mother weaned off the crippled photo editor that came bundled with her camera, I'm never going to get her to switch completely.

    Face it, folks, GTK+ is cross platform only by the loosest possible interpretation. I realize a lot of time and effort has gone into the 2.7/2.8 "redesign", but these UI changes to GIMP are too little, too late. At this point the only thing which is really going to save The GIMP on other platforms is a complete UI redesign using something other than GTK+. If GEGL is ever finished this shouldn't be too hard. Conveniently this would also allow us to change the cringe-inducing name as well. The result would be a Photoshop replacement that would look like it wasn't cobbled together by two bearded guys in a basement.