Boudewijn Rempt writes about the KDE image manipulation program Krita. He writes about Flake support and various features regarding image rendering quality like a new fast scaler. Zack Rusin writes about the ongoing effort to port WebKit to Qt4 for possible inclusion in KDE 4. A new issue of the KDE Commit-Digest has also been released, telling us about various topics like NetworkManager support in KDE 4 or the installment of techbase.kde.org. In addition, this document [.pdf] presents what has been accomplished in the Nepomuk-KDE project so far.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-06-29
Krita is as limited as GIMP. I personally feel more comfortable with Krita's GUI than with the GIMP's, because it makes more sense to me, but both of them are terribly limited. Remember that the GIMP doesn't support bold text if you don't have the specific bold TTF file.
Member since:2007-01-18
I've never like the Gimp. I find it unintuitive and hard to use, but to be fair I've never really given it a fair shake either.
I've looked at some screenshots of Krita and it looks much nicer as far as layout goes. I mainly use Photoshop for web layout work and some minor photo work. What I'm looking for personally is something that I can be happy with for such things and a good solid replacement for dreamweaver. Thus far I haven't really found anything that I like.
With that said KDE 4 does sound like it shaping up to be an awesome update.
Member since:2006-09-22
Krita is as limited as GIMP. I personally feel more comfortable with Krita's GUI than with the GIMP's, because it makes more sense to me, but both of them are terribly limited. Remember that the GIMP doesn't support bold text if you don't have the specific bold TTF file.
Besides that comment on TTF, what makes GIMP so terribly limited? I'm no graphic artist, but I'd like to know anyway.
On the other hand, Krita does have CMYK support, wich you won't find in GIMP. And yes, I also find Krita's UI more friendly.
Member since:2005-08-09
Member since:2005-11-13
Krita is a much younger program (practically at least) and thus at least to me doesn't feel as finished as the GIMP, this being said it also seems much faster moving and to be based on a technically superior framework and is adding features at a very fast pace. It also doesn't have the GIMP's distinct and controversial UI (which I happen to like personally, the GIMP being probably the only GTK app that I like the UI of but that may be just because I know it.) Krita seems slow to me but that may be because I run linux on PPC which Krita might not be optimized for (I don't blame the developers if it isn't) For right now if you don't have an issue with the GIMP's UI I think that the GIMP is still the better app, but I would guess that it will be usurped very quickly by Krita if things keep going the way they are.
Does anyone else find it kind of sad to think abut KDE moving towards WebKit which people associate with Apple, when WebKit is just a fork of KHTML.
Member since:2005-11-11
Yes. http://osnews.com/story.php/17160/KHTML-3.5.6-is-the-Most-CSS3-Comp...
That story was about KHTML after all, not webkit. I'm rather surprised KDE would move to use an engine not fully under their control. Is KDE/Apple communication flowing any better since the whole Acid2 episode?
Member since:2005-07-08
Krita [...] doesn't feel as finished as the GIMP, this being said it also seems much faster moving and to be based on a technically superior framework and is adding features at a very fast pace. [...] I think that the GIMP is still the better app, but I would guess that it will be usurped very quickly by Krita if things keep going the way they are.
This is nearly a microcosm of the entire KDE/GNOME dilemma, at least as I see it. KDE's still not quite as usable, consistent, and polished as GNOME, but it's certainly based on a technically superior framework, and it's certainly progressing at a faster rate. I'm still on GNOME, but it sure doesn't seem that this will be the case a year from now.
Member since:2005-07-07
Member since:
2006-05-18
I haven't used Krita at all, and barely used GIMP (still enough to realize that I don't like it and that it is very far away from even Photoshop 5 or 6).
I was wondering how does Krita stack up against GIMP. Is it powerful enough to replace it, is it far from replacing it, is it something to be taken seriously any time soon? What is the state of things?