Why is Gimp failing to reproduce the successes seen by Blender? Blender is huge, Gimp is miniscule.
And why won't they change the name? It means not one, but two derogatory things.
And why won't they change the name? It means not one, but two derogatory things.
The issue with any software of this complexity is tech debt. If anything, GIMP should be a big warning sign about what happens if you bet on e.g. a UI framework which moves on without you.
GTK's development and release schedule is pretty aggressive, especially with the even releases being stable and the odd releases being unstable (which no other library on the planet decided to do so). A lot of cross platform software decided to a refactor to QT because of that, and I'd argue that the problem lies with upstream GTK and its failed API stability promises along the way.
In open source projects, you cannot afford to bet on unstable UI frameworks because you don't have enough time to spend on refactors like this. If every second subminor GTK version breaks your code, it's just not possible to keep up with that.
I'm actually impressed that GIMP wasn't fully abandoned because the sheer amount of code that needed to be rewritten is massive.
GTK broke API twice in over twenty years (2->3 and 3->4), and you can parallel-install older versions. I have never heard anyone having to install specific minor releases of GTK due to breakages in the application API (theming is a different story).
Of course it's gotten a life of its own since, but that wasn't a thing when GIMP picked it.
I'd argue that GTK's goal of transforming into something more modern kind of lost GIMP because it was moving too fast.
I'm not blaming GTK for that, I get it, and GNOME has its goals and everything. But they're changing technologies so fast that nobody can keep up with it outside their gitlab bubble. Just thinking of the Vala introduction and GIR, for example, makes me think of never wanting to bet on their ecosystem.
They are kind of alienating themselves with the not-invented-here syndrom and too many experimental innovations that have similar already adopted counterparts in the language ecosystem.
My projects (written by a single part time dev) can never keep up with GTK. So I think you are actually arguing against GTK when it comes to resources necessary to use GTK, without realizing it.
Inkscape is a huge development project and most open source projects are way smaller than that, maintained by less than 5 people. I'd also like to point out that GTK4 is older than 6 years by now, and the UI/input flow changes that come with it (breaking old program architectures again).
I suspect if you described the architecture of the two apps without naming them, most devs would predict disaster for the latter. But as you say, it has not worked out this way; indeed, GTK has repeatedly dropped or... gimped... functionality that originally existed to facilitate productive interaction with the GIMP UI (such as fast custom shortcut keys), while Blender's UI remains bespoke and quirky, but also insanely powerful.
Blender’s interface is not super intuitive but I hear once you learn it the UI is good. On the other hand, Gimp felt to me like having a lot of rough edges that would always annoy me.
I also used Gimp around that time. It was already quite old. Despite all the functionality, it felt clunky and I wondered why they couldn't use Photoshop's UX - Adobe had already spent millions figuring it out for them.
My guess is that Blender is an effort by artists who created software to help them, and Gimp is an effort by software engineers who created what they feel is a "good enough" open source alternative.
...and then I tried Photoshop for the first time. It was every bit as clunky, but made up for that by also being sloooooow (at least on whatever OS X PowerPC machines the lab had back then). Couldn't figure out why anyone used it.
...then I watched someone who actually knew how to use it use it. It was still slow, still clunky, but they made that weird UI dance.
There are still plenty of apps like that. Particularly when you get into stuff like A/V where no amount of UI glitz will paper over the reality that a few poorly-chosen commands can bring the beefiest machine to its knees. You either spend the time learning how to use the software on its own terms, or suffer.
I first used Blender around 2005/2006.
GIMP was my go-to ever since Paint Shop Pro was acquired by Corel (in 2006 sigh!). Then a few years back I switched fully to Mac and GIMP became borderline unusable, specially at high resolutions. Ever since I'm a bit lost when it comes to picking a new raster graphics editor. Maybe I should try Paint Shop Pro again! The pricing seems to be reasonable.
That is a huge difference.
One is part of GNU, and one isn't. Not even being flippant.
Being a GNU project brings with it all kinds of political baggage that gets in the way of developing good UI/UX.
Blender has the advantage that its commercial competitors are just as bad or worse. GIMP competes with everything from MS Paint to Photoshop so the standards are different.
It also helps that Photoshop's bizarre non-standard UI has been taught for decades now. Access to some tools and features is a little better than in the ooen source versions but it's still a remarkably terrible UI for a tool used so commonly.
And it sucks at basic things because its devs deliberately wanted it to be like that. Go ask them why you have to do the thing you mentioned or why it is easier to draw a circle in frigging MS Paint than with GIMP without them turning ultradefensive. Yes, it has happened to me - was heavily downvoted at r/linux some years ago (and at Lemmy like a couple weeks ago) only because I mentioned this.
GIMP has serious UX flaws its devs are not humble enough to recognize that for some reason and it hurt GIMP so much for so long. It "sucks" not because lack or resourcesz lack of time to work on it or lack of manpower,as they want to frame it - but lack of humbleness from its devs.
On the bright side it seems this can be the end of that stupid mentality as they are welcoming new devs and gathered a UI/UX team.
I have a feeling that this new version will have all the same issues.