Sign up now! · Forgot password?
RSS/Atom feed identi.ca Twitter

Linux philosophy - Maximum efficiency/minimum input

This discussion is connected to the gimp-user-list.gnome.org mailing list which is provided by the GIMP developers and not related to gimpusers.com.

3 of 3 messages available
Toggle history

Please log in to manage your subscriptions.

Linux philosophy - Maximum efficiency/minimum input drankinatty 18 Jun 19:58
  Linux philosophy - Maximum efficiency/minimum input Oon-Ee Ng 19 Jun 00:05
  Linux philosophy - Maximum efficiency/minimum input Alexandre Prokoudine 19 Jun 06:58
2012-06-18 19:58:50 UTC (over 2 years ago)
postings
2
contact
Send private message

Linux philosophy - Maximum efficiency/minimum input

I'm been a linux user for over a decade and a gimp user for nearly as long. I've marveled at the philosophy of doing the greatest amount of work with a minimum of keystrokes and mouse clicks. That was the hallmark of linux software design for ages.

I was shocked when I installed 2.8 and ran into the open/save dialog problem. What hit me right off the bat was how forcing users to import/export all bitmaps and only allowing saves in .xcf seemed to fly in the face of the long precedent of efficiency build into gimp. I could no longer simply open a jpeg or png, edit and save the file as I had for years, but instead had to go through a web of additional dialogs that do not help get any more work done, but require a great deal more interaction.

I have bugged the issue and I've followed the developer thread to bring back the open/save dialog. There was years of work that went into the design of the elegant 2.6 handling of open/save of files. I have yet to see any explanation of how the 2.8 setup furthers the ability of the user to do more with fewer keystrokes or mouse clicks -- or do anything new at all other than mindlessly navigate more dialogs.

I have always been impressed with the progress the developers have made with gimp and gtk, but this is one area where they should reconsider and restore the functionality that was lost in the 2.6 -> 2.8 transition.

I fully support the devs in the progress they make, however when an idea results in a loss of ease of use, I also expect them to be wise enough to listen to the community input going forward.

Oon-Ee Ng
2012-06-19 00:05:01 UTC (over 2 years ago)

Linux philosophy - Maximum efficiency/minimum input

Linux philosophy, patch it or fork it =) isn't that what's behind stuff like trinity anyway?

Alexandre Prokoudine
2012-06-19 06:58:22 UTC (over 2 years ago)

Linux philosophy - Maximum efficiency/minimum input

On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 11:58 PM, drankinatty wrote:

I've marveled at the philosophy of doing the greatest amount of work with a minimum of keystrokes and mouse clicks. That was the hallmark of linux software design for ages.

No, it was a delusion :)

"Simply put, we know that GIMP's UI still sucks in many respects." (c) Enselic

Same person who introduced the save/export change, btw.

There was years of work that went into the design of the elegant 2.6 handling of open/save of files.

Not considered elegant by developers, obviously :)

Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org