Brandon Thomas, developer of ArtCraft, a suite of open-source creative tools meant to replicate Adobe applications for free, has now announced apps to replace Microsoft Office tools such as Excel, PowerPoint, and Word, respectively, named GridCraft, DeckCraft, and WordCraft, that are created with Claude. Thomas has shared his new clones to ArtCraft GitHub, making them free for all to download.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 19 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You've obviously never used Photoshop or GIMP because if you have then you would immediately understand why. GIMP is a completely different experience, and its UX is far inferior to Photoshop. On top of that, anybody who is used to the workflow in Photoshop will have a very steep learning curve using GIMP.

Believe it or not, but most people just want a tool that works for what they're trying to do. These apps have some bugs and rough edges still, but they're very much usable and make it trivial to switch for anybody who's used to Photoshop.

[–] some_designer_dude@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (3 children)

The venn diagram of what GIMP does and what Photoshop does isn’t the singular circle people assume. I, too, loathed my time with GIMP wondering how it ever got so popular in the OSS community, but then you realize it’s kind of all they have so of course they’ll support it no matter what.

I haven’t used it in years and based on that experience, I’m not rushing to try it again anytime soon. The UI felt like a UX designer’s prank on the world.

[–] Damage@slrpnk.net 8 points 1 day ago

I've been using the recent versions of GIMP and it's surprisingly usable. Of course tools are a bit different and in different places compared to Photoshop, but that goes for any software.

[–] oeuf@slrpnk.net 4 points 1 day ago

Yeah, you should definitely try using it again - especially since the big 3.0 release.

Menus and tool names/functions still do not map perfectly onto Photoshop's (it is its own thing after all, so why should it?), but it is a serious and sophisticated piece of software. Easily adequate for my professional reproduction work.

I switched to it from Photoshop two or three years ago and had to spend a few hours watching tutorials and reading the manual to make the transition. But now there is hardly anything I can't do in GIMP at least as fast, easily and reliably as I could in Photoshop.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 day ago

Yeah, these are very different tools. And yeah UX in GIMP is something else.