Courtesy to Twitter user XdanielArt (date of publication: 8 June 2024)
You must log in or register to comment.
The wave of GenP refugees today appreciate this post.
Adobe… Fucks people hard.
Another great alternative to Acrobat (Reader) is Okular; it’s free, open source and runs on Linux, Windows and macOS.
It’s been my go-to PDF reader since switching to Linux, since it already came pre-installed with Manjaro KDE.
is the image not loading only for me?
It loads for me on voyager, but is unreadable.
Ive been using Sumatra for pdfs. It’s open source too.
Wish there was a good FOSS Acrobat/Blue beam alternative.
I use those tools for the majority of my work as an engineer.
bluebeam is great
Countering Animator with Blender, that’s brutal. For at least some stuff Blender is also the better Illustrator.
I hate that there is not a good alternative to InDesign that works on linux.
If only the Affinity suit were to work on linux, even just with wine, I would be alright with the fact that it still is proprietary software. It was somehow able to replace my whole Ph/Ai/Id workflow but it is till keeping me from trying to switch to the penguin.
This graphic is missing Bitwig in the AU section. Definitely worth mentioning since it runs on Linux/OS X/Win.
text. no seriously, pdfs are easy to create. reading vendor locked files aren’t useful. reply with a shrug 🤷 i create most of mine with firefox print. used to generate them on the fly with php, for users to download.
So happy to see my beloved Paint Tool Sai on here! 😃 Really good list. Didn’t know there were so many alternatives
Honestly, GIMP is not a good alternative to Photoshop. I know, “it’s free” is enough for many people, but it … just isn’t.
With GIMP 3.0 it’s a bit better at least, they’ve finally added non-destructive editing:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qfaq-Cm1ZkAFull changelog here:
https://www.gimp.org/release-notes/gimp-3.0.htmlI’d dare say that unless you’ve already learnt Photoshop (and have to unlearn it) then Darktable+GIMP works fine for home photo editing.
If you’re used to Photoshop and your skills with it is what puts bread on the table… then I completely understand not switching tools.Yeah but it should tell you something that they just figured out non-destructive editing by 2025. Love the team, want to see it succeed, but it’s not PS at all.
My understanding is that a lot of tech debt has been removed with the release of 3.0 and I’m hopeful it will make future updates simpler and faster. :)
Rooting for them! I have had it installed for like 15 years lol
I have had it installed for like 15 years lol
Does never removing it count?
ha that definitely accounts for the stretches I don’t use it
GIMP didn’t “just figure out non-destructive editing by 2025”. You’re talking as if it was something that the GIMP development team just decided to randomly add recently, after previously ignoring user demands.
The foundation for that functionality (GEGL) has been in development for ages and was also used for some functionality in 2.6 for a long time. The reason why it took this long is that it’s a pretty fundamental change to how the app works. Also, that meshed with other upcoming changes at the time. Also, small development team.
I have said several times I have gimp and support them. I didn’t think they just discovered it - I’m saying the fact that in 2025 they just implemented it is indicative of why I say they’re behind.
They do good work. Yes they’re a small team. It doesn’t change the fact that the software has limitations.
The question isn’t “are they working hard?” or “are they doing a lot for what they are/their size?” It’s “how does it stack against PS?” And of course they can’t hang with the billion dollar international company with an army of programmers.
As somebody who has been trying to decided which of the RAW photo editors to use, I can tell you that Darktable has a steep learning curve over Lightroom. The UI is incredibly dense and the names of sliders don’t make sense unless you’re an image science expert.
I’ll take your word for it, I’ve never used Lightroom.
Whenever I played around with Darktable it seems finding a tutorial to get the effect I wanted was just a minute of searching away, and there’s a ton of beginner tutorials available too.
https://www.darktable.org/2024/12/howto-in-5.0/But then I was the kid that rtfm the game manual on my way home from the store and love dense UIs as an adult. :)
Been usin DT for close to a year now. I agree the learning curve is a little steeper than light room but once you get it, everything clicks into place. I can’t believe how powerful this program is and it’s free. It’s unbelievable
Darktable is a godsend to me for converting film negatives.But I pretty much only use image conversion, RGB curve, then fidget with the exposure and RGB sliders in negadoctor a little more then I’m done. No idea how to do anything else.
Yeah I really like what they’re doing and I applaud their efforts, but they are a solid decade behind PS when it comes to feature parity.
And UI usability.
More than a decade on that. I would say the usability is so bad that they are not on track to catch up ever unless something changes. Every year or so I download GIMP and try to use it for something basic, and I always fail and give up.
It’s in the roadmap. :)
https://developer.gimp.org/core/roadmap/#guiI imagine Gimp users revolting if it ever improves a lot.
Have users ever not revolted against change? :P
deleted by creator
I wonder if it would be feasible to create a different UI on top of the existing GIMP backend.
Look into PhotoGIMP, afaik it precisely delivers Photoshop-like symbols, maybe even layout, and shortcuts
I thought they had stopped development? Have t checked them in a decade.
Last release was in mars to make it work with GIMP 3.0
https://github.com/Diolinux/PhotoGIMP/releasesLast release was in mars
Which tech billionaire flew the dev team into space for this? /j
I assume you are right. So then I ask myself, for my own occasional use, would a standalone version of Photoshop from 2015 cover my needs?
Yeah, I think it would!
I was always a much heavier user of Lightroom than Photoshop anyway. I still need to choose between the FOSS options there.
The same with Lightroom sadly. The open source alternatives are either too buggy or have UX designed by very “opinionated” people, making them painful and frustrating to use. I currently want to get rid of Lightroom but can’t.
Give Darktable a go. I switched from LR to DT a year ago and im never going back.
I use krita way more than gimp
Krita is also more of a Paint.NET than a Photoshop replacement.
I love love love GIMP!!!
But yeah it’s not a PS alternative, and tbh that’s not really what it’s supposed to be or what its developers want out of it. it’s different
My go-to PS app:
All online, same controls, hell, same icons. I’m a little stunned that Adobe hasn’t sued them into oblivion.
You can pay to drop the ads, but I’m not really seeing much end user benefit otherwise. Not seeing ads ATM, maybe I blocked 'em.
It is an alternative if you are a casual user.
No
You could give Photopea a try, if you’re looking for a free (as supported) alternatives, it has all core functions and a interface that looks very familiar. No installation required so you can easily test it, and use it in any browser (not sure how well it works without mouse and keyboard or low end devices though).
If you want more than core functionality I don’t think there is a (legally) free option out there.
Always with the GIMP hate. You make a better free alternative then.
It’s not on the end user to make a UI that isn’t total ass.
If all you care about is the price its great but the UI is trash.
This meme from the late 90s is still going? It’s honestly an impressive record.
The meme that GIMP is in any way comparable to PS? Yeah, I agree.
I mean, “compares as bad” is comparable, right? :p
For PDF “your browser” should be the default recommendation. Firefox allows to add text and images now. Gimp can also be used to edit PDF.
Browser is nice. On Linux though, Okular is superb (except for its occasional problems with forms).
I’m really disappointed not to see Okular there. It’s FOSS, and it’s very cozy and useful.
Started using it recently and i agree!
What does Okular do that Firefox doesn’t? I’ve used it on some distros because it was the default but I don’t know the advantage compared to using my existing browser.
Yeah the PDF category is weird / lacking. LibreOffice Draw and Inkscape can both edit PDFs and are missing as well. Xodo looks like some mobile app only or SaaS product.
Edit: Xodo does have a free desktop PDF reader but seems like they’re certainly focused on selling their subscription based PDF editor
Isn’t it dangerous now that PDFs can run javascript? (Who had that idiotic idea, anyway?)
The main reason “your browser” isn’t enough for me is that it doesn’t allow you to add and edit bookmarks, which I use a lot to navigate large pdfs quickly.
Second is that it’s nice to keep your pdf tabs separated from your browser tabs, and a pdf reader can remember your tabs and exactly which page you were on etc.
So that’s why I’m using PDF-Xchange, I downloaded it for free idk why it says purchase.
Xodo and Xchange are both feature rich, lightweight, and easy to use programs. Browser view is fine for a peek but quickly feels clunky.
Davinci Resolve has to be one of the most jam packed free software packages available… seriously, it absolutely trounces Premiere at evvvverything
the model of free for everything except if features you’d want for producing a professional movie, and financed by hardware sales - that you don’t need unless you’re a professional - is absolutely incredible for home users
It doesn’t trounce PPro, they’re about equal IME. I’ve used both and it’s the price that makes it beat PPro. And you get the full version for free when you buy a Blackmagic camera.
personally, my reasoning for saying it trounces it is the integration of all the tools: no switching to after effects etc
but beyond that, ppro colour correction is just soooooo far behind
granted i haven’t really used it much, so i might not have “got” its workflow - it took a while for resolves to click - but it just seems so disjointed and clunky to do anything beyond cutting together a basic video
What the actual fuck is adobe acrobat? A pdf editor with subscription model payment? Firefox, the browser, can edit pdf files. It’s 2025.
Firefox can do basic annotating, adding text and adding pictures but it can’t make a new PDF from scratch.
You may be confusing Adobe Acrobat Reader with Adobe Acrobat? Full Acrobat is the proprietary tool to make a PDF file from scratch including some of the more complex functions.
PDF is an open standard and has been for a while, so there are now plenty of alternatives for most of the functions. LibreOffice Draw and Inkscape can do a lot of PDF creation functions but not all. There are also “print to PDF” options to create basic PDF documents too.
However some of the more niche functions are not widely supported or well supported; and there isn’t really any opensource dedicated PDF maker that I’m aware of. Layout tools are abundant but I think it’s things like building forms and document signing that is less easily replicated. There is Master PDF - a fully functional PDF maker which is proprietary and available for Linux; it $80 for a perpetual license. I’m not aware of any other alternatives myself.
In AEC work we’ve moved almost exclusively to a competing PDF tool called Blubeam, which is proprietary but very worth the price, with tools for scaling, dimensioning, and producing material takeoffs from PDF drawings. Much of what you’d use Acrobat for in a more typical office environment are absent or limited, though.
Adobe acrobat is THE PDF editor. PDF is a proprietary format created and developed by Adobe. Any software that can edit PDFs is doing so in a format they do not have any control over. And there just aren’t any proper PDF editors that are feature complete. now if you’re an individual who needs to make a PDF in the privacy of your own home, by all means, use a cheap or free or FOSS application to do so. But if you need that PDF to be readable and useable and seamlessly compatible on other computers for other users for ever? Better pay the Adobe tax because there is a good chance, it won’t look the way you expect it to when someone opens it up in Adobe which their company definitely has.
I’m not sure this true - PDF is an open standard. The issue isn’t generally with layout and reproducibility - a good PDF maker and a good reader will give you an accurate representation of how it looks on all devices once the PDF is created.
Certainly there isn’t a dedicated FOSS tool for make PDFs; Libre Office and Inkscape do a decent job but not perfect which may be what you’re referring to. And they’re not dedicated PDF makers plus the real problem is building fillable forms and signature tools.
But there is a proprietary alternative called Master PDF that is a dedicated and supports all the PDF standard features I believe; one perpetual license is $80 compared to Adobe subscription based charging. I’m not aware of other options myself but they may exist. But it’s a viable alternative to the “adobe tax”.
Also of course if you have Office 365 from Microsoft, you can use Word to export docs to PDF reliably (in my experience). Obviously as far as you can get from FOSS, but it is an option on Linux via web browser if you have it from work for example; at least you don’t have to pay Adobe but it’s scraping the bottom of the barrel for this threat I know!
How does Sumatra fall into all of this? It’s an open source version
not true. dont oay adobe so more pdfs will look like the user intended. dont fall adobe scams like weird functions that should be in a pdf anyways. pdfs created with masterpdfeditor look exactly as intended. so, again: no, adobe is a scam. always has been.
Funny, it’s been less than 24hrs and I got a ticket in complaining about why PDFs look one way in Ease US PDF editor and totally different in Adobe Reader. You’re just wrong. I didn’t say it was worth the money to pay for Adobe, and I didn’t say it wasn’t a scam. But I do tell the truth when it comes to true parity, there are competitors to PDF editing but there is no free PDF editors that properly do the job 100% of the time.
i do not know what “ease US PDF editor” is and dont care. there are plenty of broken editors. i am saying you are wrong to think only adobe scamware can create pdfs that look as intended in the reader.
There are a few other PDF editors that are cheaper, but they don’t have the same features. PDF seems like something that has outlived its purpose. There has to be other document formats that provide a similar or better experience and prevents alteration.
Any document format could prevent alteration with the addition of a digital signature.
should be? yes. could be? if one of the big corpo’s with money decides to spend it, yes. But don’t assume ‘there has to be one’, it’s not like file formats suddenly appear like a rare insect or something.
PowerPDF or Kofax or whatever it’s called now was very close to parity if not exceed functionality for most office jobs.
Yes, this is my company’s preferred solution.
Building off of this, the PDF standard supports all sorts of craziness. It can have embedded math and logic similar to excel files, to the point there’s templates available for banks which will automatically calculate entire loans (including weird ones like balloon mortgages and variable interest rate stuff) without leaving Adobe Reader, and the recent Doom PDF and Linux PDF projects exploit the fact that pdfs support embedded javascript.
There’s also an actual market for enterprise PDF templates like the banking ones I described with automatic calculations and whatnot. So some people literally make their living selling PDFs to businesses that businesses actually use
it won’t look the way you expect it to when someone opens it up in Adobe which their company definitely has.
That sounds like a problem between them and Adobe tbh
I don’t know how it stacks up price-wise, but I’d argue Bluebeam is a far superior PDF editing program. It even covers some word processing, Illustrator, and some PowerPoint adjacent things.
That being said, I can’t see it as practical for the average consumer.
In Acrobat I can go into print preview and see what my file will print like using only black and a spot color ink, I can auto-convert RGB images to CMYK, and it has a pretty robust set of accessibility features so the visually impaired can read it.
It’s for professionals.
