but seriously, look up photopea

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 157 points 6 months ago* (34 children)

Honestly I would tell people like this screenshotted poster to suck it up or go fuck themselves, because this is free software that is provided for you as is and for use as you wish. If you think the software isn't "adjusted enough" to meet your needs, then place requests for features in the relevant channels, be patient and try to work with the existing tools on offer, or keep shelling out booku bucks for Adobe's continually enshittifying service.

Accept your fate with the corpos instead of bitching that the community effort options aren't in your Goldilocks zone, shitbag.

God, this is why I hated Apple users at my old IT job. They'd bitch about the continually enshittifying status quo of their software and platform, and in the same statement reject all alternatives for not being "a smooth transition".

Edit: on a more positive note, Kritia, FreeCAD, and Kdenlive are all great and multiplatform.

  • source
  • hideshow 34 child comments
  • [–] 40 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    I think it's OK to complain about free software on social media. It's also OK to tell people that sometimes, if they want something to be better, they might need to be the ones to roll up their sleeves and make it happen. But not everyone has the time or the technical wherewithal to fix every tool they use. I sure couldn't implement every improvement I ever thought of for free software, I don't have the time.

    But I think It's still nice, for maintainers and for people thinking about getting into open source, to get a rolling feel for what gripes a lot of people share about open software. If I have a problem and I know a lot of people share my frustration, I'm much more motivated to try to fix it than if it's something I and no one else care about.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 6 months ago

    That belongs in a feature request though, not on mainstream social media. I'm not going to comb through feeds to try and figure out what bugfixes or features need priority development.

    I would even go as so far to say actually placing the request in the proper place matters more than donations.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 6 months ago* (2 children)

    This person wasn't saying that software developers are awful for not tailoring FOSS to their specific desires, they're venting about something that frustrates them. People should be able to vent without someone telling them to fuck themselves

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (1 child)

    Then place it in the issues/suggestions tab of the project instead of mocking the project on mainstream social media. If you're that upset with the labor of others that you get to coast on for free, you don't belong in the conversation.

    I'm tired of dealing with these kinds of people, and I'm willing to infer that maintainers, IT personnel, and friends trying to help this guy with their proprietary problems are too.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago*

    Maybe if they were talking about a specific FOSS project, but I don't think there's a TintonProClips software with a yucatec maya UI in real life. If you feel that your project is being called out here, that's on you.

    They're expressing a valid frustration about how every time you complain about [product] getting worse, you get a bunch of people telling you to essentially completely relearn how to use a computer so you can completely change your workflow and use a piece of completely unintuitive software to achieve an end result that's similar to what you wanted [product] for, with complete disregard to any reasons why you aren't already using that alternative.

    Let people complain. Don't proselytize for something unless the person complaining signals that they're looking for an alternative to what they're complaining about. Don't proselytize for something that the average user will just find confusing. If you do proselytize for something, know that you're opening both yourself and the thing you're advertising to criticism. And for the love of god, do not link a github repo to someone that you aren't damn sure will know what to do with it

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 22 points 6 months ago (3 children)

    I think this is a needlessly combative stance. If your goal is to get new users to engage with the development side, calling their criticism "bitching" isn't going to do that. Most software users don't have the first clue about software development and wouldn't even know what exactly to say if given a suggestion form. The best feedback a lot of new users can give is "the user experience is clunky and unintuitive".

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

    My stance has been forged by the repeated disappointing interactions that I've had with people who I spend painstaking amounts of time illustrating how to solve their problems with these tools and why a certain design quirk is the way it is vs. the proprietary model.

    Without fail, the kinds of users like the screenshotted poster will look at me with a blank face or reply in forum chats with the same statement: "But can't they just make it usable like [enshittified software] instead?"

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    How can we bridge this gap? At least to the point where users can give constructive feedback like "I wanted to do this thing, and searched for a way here and here. It took me hours to figure out how to do it. It would have been intuitive if..." Maybe we will have to be proactive about UX issues and have proper channels for this information?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago

    It would have been intuitive if...

    One issue I see with suggestions is that everyone thinks their a designer. What they suggest might even be an improvement for that one small tool but would make the overall experience less intuitive. Overall, I think OSS should cater to their existing users plus a little bit more. Make the experience better for the people who really want to try to use it but eventually give up in frustration. Over time, it will improve and the user base will increase.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 27 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    It's not the same, the idea is that you are suggesting things that are not suitable replacements. You can't then say "bUt ItS fReE sOfTwArE" as it that makes it a suitable replacement.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 41 points 6 months ago*

    That's the kicker though. The poster framed it as Adobe was the only game in town that was abusing them, a friend told them about a service that was free and had their entire feature set, but it was rejected due to UI and platform concerns.

    Not all free software will reach feature or UI parity with their proprietary competition. That's just reality. However, if you are paying a grand total of $0 for the alternative and have no interest in being constructive either through submitting a feature request or contributing code (donating doesn't have an obligation for anything so in this circumstance that wouldn't factor), then you should just either accept the software "as is" (which is a key component of most licenses), or accept that it's not for you.

    Stay with the devil that you know if you disregard positioned alternatives for not being "suitable enough", and if you want to change that, be proactive and open-minded. Not bitch.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 6 months ago (8 children)

    I have a hard time taking a rant seriously when it includes such a neologistic gem as ‘booku’.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    Apologies - took it from a video that used it to describe a ludicrous amount of money being spent. Same spelling, by the way (from closed captions)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 11 points 6 months ago

    ‘Beaucoup’ is the word you were looking for. Although Wiktionary says that ‘bookoo’ and similar spellings are indeed used alternatively, possibly popularised by US soldiers in Vietnam. And, although the French pronunciation is ‘boh-koo’, Louisianan is indeed ‘bookoo’.

    So my jab about it being a neologism was inadvertently on the nose, though belated by fifty years.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 6 months ago* (5 children)

    How old does a word have to be to satisfy you?

    “Beaucoup” is like 800 years old. Shitty spelling isn’t a neologism.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    Not the lemming you replied to, but I've never seen the word booku before, and had no clue what it meant until your post. Still don't know what beaucoup is doing in an English post but sure

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 6 months ago (8 children)

    Yeah,man. Can you believe those carpenters that still want to buy hammers from big tool? Our federation of unemployed navel gazers has built at least three hammer replacements that consist of a rock attached to a thick stick with Elmer's glue, but they just wanna throw their money at the big tool companies. I even told them that our next iteration will have one side of the rock flattened for better hammering, but they keep going on about "ergonomics", and "effectiveness".

    I swear, I think all the open source people see software as toys and only as toys. For those of us who actually use it to do things, it's a tool, and it needs to work like the tools I've been using at work for more decades than I want to own up to.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 6 months ago (3 children)

    Dude, the open source tools only differ in the sense that you own the software and therefore are immune to enshittification, and that they are provided as is without direct customer support.

    If you're saying a particular "hammer" is missing a component that you relied on previously with what you purchased from "big tool", there's a suggestions box right there that costs you nothing and will be read by the maintainers. You'll have to just be patient and try it out once it's released (for free mind you).

    Also, that hammer from "big tool" has an IED planted into the handle that will explode if you don't swipe your credit card into it every month. Just saying.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    They also differ in the sense that you have to completely relearn how to do everything you've been doing your whole career and usually in a way that is more complicated and less efficient.

    It's not missing components, it's the fact that the most commonly used components are clunkier, less user friendly, and feel like an afterthought tacked on after someone made the software to prove they could.witbout ever talking to anyone who uses the software to do their job. If Open Office were as good a suite of office software as Microsoft, it'd be the industry standard. No business wants to pay Microsoft license fees just because, they do it because the tools work better and create a better end product.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    If Open Office were as good a suite of office software as Microsoft, it’d be the industry standard. No business wants to pay Microsoft license fees just because, they do it because the tools work better and create a better end product.

    The idea that everything that businesses do is as efficient as physically possible and the executives are all mega geniuses that are incapable of making bad decisions (or are even incentivized to make good decisions) is untrue.

    COBAL is not the greatest programming language to ever be invented. It, and the various pieces of dogshit software that companies collectively shell out billions for every year, are used because they are entrenched in their respective industries and corporate structures, not because of their brilliant design.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -1 points 6 months ago

    The idea that everything that businesses do is as efficient as physically possible and the executives are all mega geniuses that are incapable of making bad decisions (or are even incentivized to make good decisions) is untrue.

    I never said that was true. But I've sat through enough budget meetings to know for certain that if Open Office were even "good enough", let alone "as good" it would be the corporate standard, because everyone hates paying for Office.

    But it isn't, for all the reasons I listed before.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 6 months ago (3 children)

    You are hilariously misinformed about things lmao

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    Nah, you're just delusional that your toy hammer is a good hammer.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago* (1 child)

    Bro OSS runs the fucking world. You are using stacks and fucking stacks of it right now. It is the backbone of literally fucking everything. It is in some respects the most serious software that has ever been produced. Your delusional codependence on an abusive monopoly is just that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 6 months ago

    Bro OSS runs the fucking world

    Yes, I'm well aware.

    OSS office productivity tools still suck out loud, and the OSS nerds should stick to making widgets that make networking work better and keep their noses out of a domain they clearly don't understand. Because open source office and graphic design software sucks out loud, and always has.

    Get snooty with people who want to criticize OSS compilers, networking, and development tools all you want. But don't try to push GIMP as an equivalent to Photoshop or the ridiculous Open Office suite as being in the same class as Microsoft. Don't get me wrong - I wish to fuck there were a worthwhile alternative, but the industry standards are industry standards for a reason, and the people who make OSS don't spend enough time working as an admin grunt to have the faintest clue why their "alternatives" aren't worth the time it takes to install them and then uninstall them when it takes 20 minutes to create a document template.

  • source
  • parent