This applies to WinBLOWS users as well.
That is a huge load of 
I found this video today and I found it quite interesting and relevant to this discussion.
Another one that popped up in the related videos. This one is about open-source alternatives.
At one point in the video (early), he says that no professional would use GIMP, and I assume he would say that for the other apps as well.
Professional GIMP user: https://www.instagram.com/ctchrysler/
Professional Inkscape user: https://logosbynick.com/
Professional Blender user: https://www.instagram.com/dedouze/
I follow all three of these professionals, and the one thing they all have in common is that they made a decision from early to stick to and learn one app. Or that when they started using the app, they decided to give it an honest period of dedicated time.
This is the same thing any and everyone has to do when they take up an Adobe product, Windows, etc.
Later in the video, he mentions that making the UI/UX similar to what people are already used to may be key to adoption, and I agree somewhat. But I think that the UI/UX of apps should be customisable more than anything. It shouldn’t be that a person must work in a certain design paradigm.
2 Likes
He’s way off. I’ve been using Corel Draw, Adobe Illustrator and Inkscape in a professional capacity for over 20 years. I like Inkscape the most out of them, so I eventually dropped the other two. I’m also successfully using GIMP as a replacement for Photoshop in the same professional capacity.
yes, but also no
It would be nice to have an absolute failproof distro, what could be used without any usage of the terminal.
That way, people who dont want to tinker, can use linux and push the overall popularity of linux. And than we maybe get better hardware and software support.
Here’s my 2 cents, as someone who puts way more work into my computers (Windows AND Linux) than the average person, but way less work into them than the average Linux user:
There is only one way to have an utterly-convenient, “it just works” PC experience, and that is to be a normie and use Widows/Mac as Microsoft/Apple intends you to. Don’t resist the privacy invasions. Don’t own your computer, your media, or your tools. Pay for licences to high-quality software, even if it’s not the software you’d prefer to use.
If you have a moral or practical objection to using a PC like that, it takes some work. I have found that Windows and Linux have similar amounts of inconvenience, though the experience is qualitatively very different.
Should Linux take it upon itself to be better? Absolutely. Ask yourself: should people have the freedom to not care about their technology, and still be treated with dignity and privacy? Should the ignorant and the lazy be allowed to go about their days without being harassed, surveiled and up-sold? If you agree that they do, then you must advocate for Linux to offer a good, “it just works” desktop experience, provided that it does not compromise the other important things Linux does.
The good news is that, for many people, it’s already there. If a person can get by with a Chromebook, they can definitely be satisfied with Linux.
The human brain is in neurological development until you’re in your late twenties. From then on, over the next 10-15 years, you more or less slowly realize you’re not that special, even if you use Linux!
The topic question is a purely philosophical one. It sounds like a wishful thinking, a wish that nobody can answer No. IMHO, a more suitable question (IIUC the OP) would be:
Should everyone spend a respectable ammount of his free time to contribute on Linux software?
I think this question would produce a better result. There are no many (not necessarily Linux users) people that would spend time or anything else for something for free. That’s why Linux commercial companies (that have actually raised Linux usage) have no priority on cooperation with each other, because they think each other as their competitor, thus they would potentially lose some market share. Their indoors moto seems to be “They should do it My Way”.
I could write an essay to justify my short summary of my perspective, but it is better to give a real world example, with a question.
Let’s say I have been working on a project that would simplify Linux usage for everyone. It is structured, modular, in an easy and popular programming language, includes localization feature and has been designed to be easy to add whatever feature is needed in the future. It is command line based, with many output types, that could be easily transformed to graphical UIs.
How many are willing to spend of their free time to contribute to the development, without being paid any money?
That is the real question William! 
If it’s immutable I won’t donate a second of time :).
I personally would do my share if I had the chops…but that said, your hypothetical not necessarily answerable either. you have a descendant of dos, this old command-line distro of yours…modular…if was truly revolutionary you or semi-industry-changing you would get volunteers and even underwriting–all it takes is a couple people onboard to tip the scales.
Although I have nothing to contribute you inspired me. I mean this is how distros evolve: dial in the underneath, then branch into the GUI….what if this philosophy was reversed? Have the shell stuff conceptualized and dialed in…then invent the underneath.
anyways, back to my sonnet…
I’m not gonna lie, I’ve never donated any money for the purpose of Linux development.
I’ve only ever contributed my time, fixes for specific software, workarounds, wallpapers, etc.
However, when it comes to open source, I’ve donated to Krita, Blender, Thunderbird, Archcraft, Ardour, etc.
Software that I use, basically.
Look at this forum.
While it’s not the majority, many in just this forum have already contributed to the overall development of Linux by helping others fix minor to major issues, submitting bug reports, etc.
Yes, most have not submitted code nor money, but what they have done is important too.
All of which is unpaid.
Linux . . . is a hobby with me. . .the computer and Linux. It’s opened up my mind by showing me what can be possible. The things that have given me the most satisfaction in life are the things you try to teach yourself. That’s the excitement in using Linux.
Rich;)
As someone who loves to learn new things this was a big attraction to Linux for me also.
PhotoGIMP was a neat idea, that essentially dressed the Gimp UI up like Photoshop, to overcome the UI familiarity issue.
I’m not certain how ready it is for the current release of Gimp. For the most part, I’ve simply committed to forgetting about Photoshop and just getting used to default Gimp, so as to remove any dependency on something like this.
While it can work, I can’t lie when I say that compared to Photoshop, GIMP is just extremely weird and finicky, and I’m a noob at Photoshop so both are weird and finicky than how I expected it to work.
I agree they are both weird and unintuitive. I hate some things about GIMP, but I’ve managed to do my job with it and for me that’s the bottom line. given the fact that one costs $276 a year and the other one is free, I think there is no contest.
Yeah, I actually have the settings for PhotoGIMP coupled with my gimp-dev installation. Better looking. So, it does work.
I have licences for CSP, all Affinity apps, and Paintstorm Studio. Only the latter works on Linux properly, but I just decided to get used to what works out of the box, because even PSS actually needs a little hand-holding to work properly. Just one file/package and then it’s all good though.
But the reason I don’t use it regardless is that I use Krita, which is also on Android. So, I decided to use Krita as my main on both tablet and laptop, while using other apps for some specific feature or brush that Krita doesn’t have.
So, I have many art apps on both devices that go months without me even remembering they exist unless I see an update for them. 
NEWS FLASH: PLENTY of distros where one doesn’t have to ever tough the terminal if they choose not to.
in theorie, yes