this post was submitted on 17 Mar 2025
886 points (99.7% liked)

Open Source

34730 readers
1429 users here now

All about open source! Feel free to ask questions, and share news, and interesting stuff!

Useful Links

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon from opensource.org, but we are not affiliated with them.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 190 points 1 day ago (94 children)

Man, after decades, why does GIMP still have a marketing problem?

Just visit https://www.gimp.org/ and compare it to https://www.adobe.com/ca/products/photoshop.html

Just assume both did exactly the same thing and cost the exact same amount (free or otherwise). Which would you choose based on their website?

Why does GIMP (and pretty much all FOSS) have to be so secretive about their product? Why no screenshots? Why not showcase the software on their website?

It's so damn frustrating that every FOSS app appears to be command line software, or assumed that the user knows everything about it already.

Devs, you might have a killer piece of software, but screenshots go a long way to help with gaining interest and adoption.

[–] Hadriscus@lemm.ee 5 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

I don't know man, I think the Photoshop homepage reeks of corpo crap, whereas the Gimp homepage does a good job at cleanly presenting the program in a quick way. Maybe I'm just used to FOSS, or already too allergic to corporate software, but going by the homepage design, my preference is obvious, there's not even a contest

[–] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 2 points 5 hours ago

I think my point was missed. I wasn't saying that GIMP should copy what Adobe does (I can't stand Adobe and their “business model” spyware bullshit.

My point was more to show that Adobe showcases the features of the software, so a potential user knows what it does without needing to go through the trouble of downloading it. It may not be what the user wants, and that's ok, at least they know!

But GIMP is so vague in their description and offers no insight to what the app does or looks like. There's no need to be mysterious.

[–] menemen@lemmy.ml 7 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

I mean, tastes are different, but I really did not like the photshop page design.

[–] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 4 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Taste aside, you can easily see what features Photoshop has, rather than guessing, right?

I should have used a FOSS example, since Adobe is just bad in general (users saying the page has pop-ups, etc.).

[–] menemen@lemmy.ml 1 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (1 children)

All I see is "Ooooh look, we use AI!" which actually repels me quite a lot. The page leaves the impression that photoshop is a toy, not a tool.

[–] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 5 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Ok, let's get off Adobe for a second... here's a FOSS example: https://www.rawtherapee.com/

Easy to understand exactly what it does, screenshots are excellent. Surely, you can agree that this is better than how GIMP presents itself, right?

[–] newfoundlandsteak@lemmy.world 1 points 6 hours ago

Great updated example and I look forward to hearing the arguments against this just like Adobe.

[–] AuroraB@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 7 hours ago

the gimp one displays normally, while the adobe one shows a blank white page.

the choice is obvious

[–] pHr34kY@lemmy.world 6 points 10 hours ago

The photoshop page doesn't even have a download link.

0/10 would not download.

[–] Leeuk@feddit.uk 16 points 15 hours ago

Agree, however on clicking the photoshop link was first hit with 2 popups before I could see the page.

load more comments (88 replies)