While Krita and GIMP have a large overlap of functionality, the two programs are fundamentally different. GIMP is more suitable for editing photos and other raster-based images, while Krita is primarily a drawing/painting program.
Both are really good, so I can’t, in good conscience, vote in this poll. It is true that I use GIMP more, but that is simply because I have more tasks to do at which GIMP is better, but if I had different tasks, or had more of an artistic affinity, I’d use Krita more.
In my opinion, Krita has a nicer UI, being based on Qt, rather than GTK which can be quite clunky at times.
I would also like to add a third, in my opinion, essential editor for raster-based images to this list: LibreSprite. When it comes to pixel art specifically (low resolution, low colour depth images), LibreSprite is much better than either GIMP or Krita – its simplicity is really its main strength.
And finally, I’d like to mention that I’m really looking forward to GIMP 3.0 update. I’m sure it will work fine on my GNU Hurd system.
Well, that’s my experience and opinion about how I’m using it.
Most of the Linux/UNIX tools we use everyday were just an academic/corporate tools of a specific corporations for specific tasks. And yet their current applications may differ a lot.
TL;DR: You can share your opinion in whatever way you want, but consideration is key in my opinion.
That’s fine. Everyone can have an opinion. Was just saying the word “terrible” could’ve (and probably should’ve) been “Not great/good”.
Example: Not great at handling text/fonts, especially at scaling them.
Not sure what you mean here, but the idea is that these apps are free and open-source, so remarks about what you don’t like about them should be considerate of this fact, imho.
Now, if you paid for it only to have it crash for no apparent reason at random times, then you would be completely justified in saying whatever you want about it. Looking at you Adob3.
