I guess that would explain the difficulties some apps face without push notifications and releasing APKs. These big companies want you to rely on their systems. Signal was pushing their app through play store. I don’t know if an equivalent exists, but it really needs to. We need this, combined with f-droid, so we don’t have to use spyware like the Play Store.

I don’t agree, it is perfectly normal to spy on people and make sure they’re not committing a crime. I’m sure execs of these companies and those politicians would be fine with that if we were watching from their windows just to make sure they aren’t using illegal content… /s

So they abandoned what built them up. They sold out?

Yes. Jitsi was one of the best for a while. Secure and just works. I think Element wasn’t e2e encrypted while debugging but I’m guessing is close to usable. I mentioned it more as a FOSS alternative.

Most of the public don’t know GIMP, the ones that do see the way it’s communicated from the community.

You say I can die on this hill. I said 2 points in the post you responded to.

1. Blender is great software
2. That people use GIMP.

What did I say that is wrong in that comment? What did you disagree with? Are you saying Blender isn’t great, or are you saying zero people use GIMP?

If you agree with both the sentiments I said, you either responded to the wrong message, or you’re going out of your way to argue with me, and not the points I made.

I never disregarded the points about the UI. The UI could do with improvements. UI doesn’t improve by people blasting a piece of software on the internet, it comes by giving your time to help improve it, or forking it, or donating to someone that can. If you’re not doing any of those things, you’re not actually helping to address the problem. It’s not constructive criticism or helpful. It’s just putting yourself on a sandbox as if your opinions mean more about the software than the people who take time to make it and improve it.

Maybe their issue tracker is the best bet, or in a separate question thread about the issues. Raising it in every thread it comes up when people recommending it isn’t going to solve the issue or help anything, is it?

Blender is for models, not art. It’s different software. It’s great at what it does. Expecting that because one open source project can beat proprietary then all can is a pretty shallow view. A project relies on volunteers, sacrifice and funding.

You’re saying it’s bad because no one you know uses it doesn’t suggest no-one uses it, just you don’t know the users of it. Maybe your circle is as open minded to software as you are. Similar people surround themselves with each other. It says more about you than the software.

Considering I know many artists that use it as first choice, I know you’re wrong.

It’s good software, you just don’t like it.

That is true, but to get free software made by people in their free time and say “this is rubbish” is a little ungrateful.

“Here, have this free food…”. " ewww gross, that is so bad".

I’m involved in open source software, and of the artists I’m aware of, most use GIMP, not Krita, because it has better features. Krita is a great option, but it doesn’t quite have the same features for producing quality art.

Tenacity, not audacity. Audacity got took over by a company with questionable record and tried to add telemetry into it. Tenacity was the OS fork which stayed true to principles.

GIMP may not be your bag, but it’s highly used and many find it has much higher quality features than the alternatives. UI may not be popular, but it doesn’t prevent it being a solid bit of open source software.

Btw, what steps have you taken to improve open source graphics software? It’s easy to bash, it’s harder to learn and contribute.

Open source contributors > open source advocates > grateful open source users > almost everyone else > open source critics

Damn, this positivity isn’t welcome in free software circles! How can I respect you? (Kidding, I think you and your positivity is awesome.)

I’m not, but it’s not like it’s an occasional thing. Every time it’s brought up, it’s trashed. Free software that does a better job than anything else free, and folk bash it. Either they like and are motivated by Adobe dominance, or they’re useful idiots.

It’s balanced to say “great program, but could do with a UI improvement”. It isn’t to say it’s unusable because of UI. I cannot imagine any free software advocate should be proud of taking that line.

I have suspected for a while it is astroturfing. Same as with GIMP and Libre Office where inevitably someone will trash the UI as it’s “soooo bad”. If you say a lie, and repeat it enough, people start to believe it.

Where did you even find it? Why are you sharing it and letting it influence you if you know it is questionable?

Who are the people that wrote that website?

It’s more than a little questionable. It’s read like someone with a vendetta. For example: “report was published when the Matrix developers published some «privacy improvements»” “We have not read it. We do not think it is worth wasting more time.”

I appreciate the clarification. Thanks.

Just to clarify. I thought WA had e2e encryption before Signal but got bought out by Facebook, so Signal developed including with e2e encryption and open source code (at least initially) as an alternative. Is that correct?