gimp

PS has tools that Gimp doesn't have and Gimp has tool that PS doesn't have.

Frankly, if XCF was the industry file format and Gimp was taught in school, Gimp would be the tool everyone uses.

As I keep saying, Gimp's UI and portability is what makes me keep using Gimp despite also having Adobe CC installed on my workstation.

It seems like the desktop environment is Gnome and they pre-install Libre Office, gimp and inkscape.

A user of a tool like Gimp or Photoshop makes the application work for him.

I've used both, and Gimp falls flat in the implementation of the features that it does have.

Last time I checked, the Gimp team flat out refused to add support for 3D rendering.

It is worse than what gimp is compared to photoshop.

Just like gimp, theoretically you can use it, and even make some good things with it, but you really, really don't want to.

I don't really need to try and run 'the gimp' on my phone.

I started working with Gimp because it was the only tool that ran on Linux that was capable enough to do what I required.

As Gimp introduces more powerful features, I will take advantage of them.

I know Gimp is always referenced as the "alternative" to Photoshop but I think it still suffers from a lot of usability issues.

[1] Gimp seems to still be missing "adjustment layers," which I swear are used in 95% of the nontrivial tutorials I've seen for PhotoShop.

Gimp doesn't even come close in functionality -- but even worse, the various tutorials and scripts you can follow or acquire for PhotoShop don't work in Gimp.

I do know people who use and swear by Gimp, for example, or Inkscape.

I'm sorry but PS is not vastly superior to Gimp; it's largely equivalent.