Pier Luigi Fiorini is the lead developer of Mockup. Mockup is an open source effort to create a modern desktop operating system. It is based on Linux 2.6 and supports native POSIX threading, hardware detection, automatic device creation and automatic network configuration. The user interface, written using Qt 4, runs on Xorg, but will also support the framebuffer in future versions. Read on for an interview. Note that Fiorini is not a native English speaker, so forgive any spelling/grammar errors.
Dismissing KDE and GNOME is easy, but guess where he will get his applications from eventually!
I was thinking the same thing. I understand that it is a burden that we GNU/Linux users have to deal with (using QT (some integrated with the kde desktop) and GTK apps) but to say that KDE/GNOME is crap and throw the baby out with the bath water seems kind of elitest.
Well, to put it bluntly, they would be crap. Now, before all of you jump down my throat for being a “troll” and not agreeing with you, let me explain.
A graphical environment is composed of many things: the desktop, widgets, toolbars, etc that all influence the whole. If one is bad, it generally takes down the whole thing; this includes applications. Using gnome/kde apps in a different environment means they generally don’t blend in or interact well, and can disrupt the entire experience.
-bytecoder
Technically since this is written using Qt and runs on top of Linux the developers could simply write binary compatible libraries for the KDE specific parts of the applications and then KDE apps should be able to work just fine with it. After all KDE uses the Qt toolkit and runs on Linux, the only real issue is the design of the menus and toolbars which could be modified.
Nice idea.
In one of my humble prospective thinkings it appeared some time ago. But are there any technical drawbacks/tradeoffs?
Framebuffer drivers for most hardware are lacking. I’m getting 60Hz refresh max. On a CRT that is a serious headache inducing drawback.
“””Why waste time, space and CPU for tons of console-based editors?”””
Hmm, if this litte editors really needs time, space and CPU for tons, he must do really something wild on his console.
I can’t type so fast that CPU spends 99% in VIM and waste half of my harddisc.
Hey Fiorini, I want your 40gb .vimrc please. This looks like I can do everything with vim.
I thought he was a liar, his website isn’t updated since March.
Most likely not. This is the same guy who has had several stillborn similar projects, BeOS related IIRC.
And right now, Mockup only exists as Mockups.
I really like an effort to leverage the underlaying feature of the OS, but surely there are more exiting products than Linux for that? Plan9?
Going with Linux they’ll have the option to utilize the full potential of Reiser4 though, hopefully.
Reading this interview I get the impression that they are more focused on what’s wrong with Gnome/KDE than with a real vision for their target audience though.
Nice to see another DE for Linux using Qt.
I’m also a proud user of vim
Is this guy that much of a loser that he’s actually “proud” to use vim.
I love vim like the next geek that wants fast editing, but I’m not “proud” of it, and let’s face some facts: the only thing good about vim are the keybindings. The actual code and extensibility of vim is an absolute travesty.
” The actual code and extensibility of vim is an absolute travesty. ”
In comparison to what ?!? There is nothing a travesty about it though. Okay I like vim , I have been using Vim for ages but I don’t use it for everything , the same way I have been using Gedit and Kate for ages and I don’t use them for everything, I now use Eclipse and I DON’T USE THAT for everything. All these programs were made in
different times and the ideas were different then.
It’s like comparing DOS,CP/M and LINUX . Different Era
, different way of doing things. I can’t diss DOS and I never will. I loved DOS, a travesty it was not….
I really don’t get what the vicious attack is about , I mean really.
In comparison to what ?!? There is nothing a travesty about it though
Just look at the code and you’ll understand. You’ve got crap like #ifdef VMS all over the place, and vim even has to have replacements for certain c stdlib functions because various obscure platforms have broken compilers or broken libraries.
I love vim, but being stuck in console world (and yes, even gtk-vim is still console world, has basically hurt it.
But what is really needed, and has been discussed before on the mailing lists is a vim library. That way people can write various front ends easily, and also extend it.
A lot of what he says is true. Default installs of the major distros do give ‘naive users’ problems with multiple versions of apps that do similar things. Pick one is right. And he’s not alone in taking this line – distros like BeatriX, PC Linux, DesktopBSD, PCBSD, all head in this direction.
The closest I have come to setting up a simple system for a naive user like this is with Windowmaker and Debian. But its only simple on the surface – if they want to install more software, the problems start. Not least, I installed it, now where is it?
The reservation you have to feel is that the problem is not primarily rewriting KDE/Gnome. Its much more to do with Systems Administration – something, on OS9, that we all did without realising we were, it was so easy!
I think he meant “happy”, with that “proud” word.
I rarely feel like trolling, but this doesn’t look like a completely thought-out project to me. I call vaporware on it.
Unfortunately, your vaporware statement is not a troll or unfounded. At least a year and a half ago there was a similiar interview and we haven’t seen anything yet…I guess there has been a beta 0.1 or something, but this isn’t some brandspanking new.
If you want to something real interesting, check out http://www.komodoware.com. It seems that mockup is just a rehash of XFCE, but with Qt.
nice talk, but show me some results!
looking at the screenshots, i was not really impressed.
concerning his critique at KDE – he has a point, de KDE guys should develop a “light” version of KDE for starting users. something like a menu where you can choose between “kde novice”, “kde intermediate” and “kde expert” – with the most options in the expert mode
That’s actually not that great of an idea. Generally speaking, if software needs modes to be usable, it’s either incredibly complex by nature or it’s just badly designed; in this case, it’s the latter.
p.s. Menus are overused.
-bytecoder
There already is a KDE “light”. Look here: http://dot.kde.org/988934998/997994187/
There’s only a word I can use about the philosophy behind Mockup.
Idiocy.
Why a Linux distro ships with a lot of CD-ROMs full of software that won’t be used by a lot of people?
To provide them choice, that’s one of the basic advantages of OSS? To give them as much software as they will ever need without having to pay/crack/get-locked-in by it?
Do you know when I first started to think to switch to Linux, 2 years and a half ago? When I read how many free software packages were available on Debian.
Why waste time, space and CPU for tons of console-based editors? Just choose one and provide it to your user.
No. No. No. No. For example, I usually use the not-so-geeky nano editor for casual editing. Many distros don’t include it, they include it vim or emacs or what. But if there’s something that fits best MY needs, and it is freely available, why shouldn’t you include it? If I want an OS that makes me stick with arbitrary vendor decisions, I would stick with Windows and Notepad.
The way we’re working allows us to provide users a consistent desktop, one toolkit, one desktop.
Why? The beauty of Un*x on the desktop lies on the variety and flexibility of their WM and DM, able to fit every need without compromises. I recently switched from KDE to Fluxbox on my desktop. I used (in this order) Windowmaker, Fluxbox and nolw IceWM+idesk on an old machine I have at my parent’s house. To have N toolkits and N desktops is one of main Linux strength. All my friends just stare me in awe when I describe they can choose their desktop manager, and how flexible they can be. If you want, provide your users a clear and consistent default (just like Debian does with GNOME or Mandrake with KDE), but don’t leave out choice.
why they let users choose what sound system GNOME has to use?
Because the default can be buggy. Because the default can be not what’s good for my hardware. Because something new and better can always come on from OSS community. Because if I run OSS, it’s because I can choose every component of my desktop.
I hate this kind of mentality that’s slowly infecting the OSS community. They seem to think that a usable desktop is a dumbed-down desktop that relies on tyrannic developer decisions. This is stupid and insulting to users. A usable desktop is a flexible, intuitive environment where your mind is free to use every tool it can have at its will to get your work done, not a cage where you can only do what developers/experts think you have to do.
There’s only a word I can use about the philosophy behind Mockup.
There’s only one thing I can say about your comments – idiocy.
To provide them choice, that’s one of the basic advantages of OSS? To give them as much software as they will ever need without having to pay/crack/get-locked-in by it?
Bahah, OSS doesn’t give you anymore choice then any other platform. You can replace the Explorer shell in windows and windows has much more software than linux ever will have. Sorry to burst your fangirl illusion, but you’re “locked” into any platform you use.
No. No. No. No. For example, I usually use the not-so-geeky nano editor for casual editing. Many distros don’t include it, they include it vim or emacs or what. But if there’s something that fits best MY needs, and it is freely available, why shouldn’t you include it? If I want an OS that makes me stick with arbitrary vendor decisions, I would stick with Windows and Notepad.
Are you really that stupid? Well, you’re a linux fangirl, so that’s pretty much begging the question, but you have to be a real idiot to think that you’re stuck with notepad in windows. Windows has much more choice in editors than linux ever will have.
Why? The beauty of Un*x on the desktop lies on the variety and flexibility of their WM and DM, able to fit every need without compromises.
yeah, haha, right..beauty and no compromises. It’s good to see that your indoctrination sessions are going well.
To have N toolkits and N desktops is one of main Linux strength.
Users don’t give a crap about toolkits. Programmers do. Once again, windows has more toolkits than linux ever will have.
All my friends just stare me in awe when I describe they can choose their desktop manager, and how flexible they can be.
Your friends sound as stupid as you
If you want, provide your users a clear and consistent default (just like Debian does with GNOME or Mandrake with KDE), but don’t leave out choice.
Choice? Yeah, you fanidiots think choice is good as long as it revolves linux.
Because if I run OSS, it’s because I can choose every component of my desktop.
Oh guess what moron, nobody is going to force you to use Mockup.
I hate this kind of mentality that’s slowly infecting the OSS community.
Yeah, there’s a lot of idiocy in the OSS “community”
A usable desktop is a flexible, intuitive environment where your mind is free to use every tool it can have at its will to get your work done, not a cage where you can only do what developers/experts think you have to do.
Great, I think I’ll stick with windows then since I have many more tools than linux.
Mockup is probably going nowhere but not for the idiotic reasons you gave.
Bahah, OSS doesn’t give you anymore choice then any other platform. You can replace the Explorer shell in windows and windows has much more software than linux ever will have. Sorry to burst your fangirl illusion, but you’re “locked” into any platform you use.
If you are comparing a linux de with using something other then explorer to browse your hd, you obviously have no idea what you are talking about.
Are you really that stupid? Well, you’re a linux fangirl, so that’s pretty much begging the question, but you have to be a real idiot to think that you’re stuck with notepad in windows. Windows has much more choice in editors than linux ever will have.
Windows has more choice in many, many categories. text editors are not one. Once again, you are showing ignorance.
Users don’t give a crap about toolkits. Programmers do. Once again, windows has more toolkits than linux ever will have.
By toolkit i assume you mean GUI APIs. Windows most definately does not have more, and this is a good thing. yet again, total ignorance. visit a linux forum sometime, linux users care quite a bit about what api an app uses.
Ive used windows before, and find it totally unacceptable for serious work. Linux allows me to customize my work environment in ways that are impossible in windows without complete shell replacements, which tend to be buggy, and lack all sorts of functionality (ie. a desktop).
Wouldnt have normally bothered feeding a troll, but i had some time to kill.
If you are comparing a linux de with using something other then explorer to browse your hd, you obviously have no idea what you are talking about.
Here moron, the first hit on google. http://www.astonshell.com/aston/. That’s not the only one.
Windows has more choice in many, many categories. text editors are not one. Once again, you are showing ignorance.
Put down the crack pipe, almost every editor for unix is available for windows. But with windows, there’s a whole bunch more.
By toolkit i assume you mean GUI APIs. Windows most definately does not have more, and this is a good thing. yet again, total ignorance. visit a linux forum sometime, linux users care quite a bit about what api an app uses.
Let’s see, gtk+, qt, wxwidgets, FOX, what else do you need zealot boy? They all run on windows. Once again, you linux cult members fail it.
Ive used windows before, and find it totally unacceptable for serious work. Linux allows me to customize my work environment in ways that are impossible in windows without complete shell replacements, which tend to be buggy, and lack all sorts of functionality (ie. a desktop).
Yeah, because you live in your basement and don’t need to work in a professional business environment. And once again, there are shell replacemnts for windows. See link above.
What’s your real problem, Bill? Has Steve been bitch-slapping you again?
If you are comparing a linux de with using something other then explorer to browse your hd, you obviously have no idea what you are talking about.
Here moron, the first hit on google. http://www.astonshell.com/aston/. That’s not the only one.
how about you actually look at what i quoted before you make yourself look like a complete retard.
Put down the crack pipe, almost every editor for unix is available for windows. But with windows, there’s a whole bunch more.
yes, but they are rarely as full featured. if you are talking ports though, i would say the two are roughly even. everything is either ported or cloned if it has enough of a following. since we are talking thousands of apps, i think the whole discussion is rather silly.
Let’s see, gtk+, qt, wxwidgets, FOX, what else do you need zealot boy? They all run on windows. Once again, you linux cult members fail it.
99.9999999999% of all windows apps run on either the MFC or that borland api. im sorry if this is confusing to you, but that is actually a good thing for windows. its really a one in a million thing where you run into a non standard api being used.
and the linux versions of all of those tend to be much better supported, as their volume of both users and developers on linux is greater then on windows.
Yeah, because you live in your basement and don’t need to work in a professional business environment. And once again, there are shell replacemnts for windows. See link above.
Really. I write a ERP/Production Management webapp that is used by many of the fortune 500 apparel companies. Currently, im making 37k/year as an intermediate programmer, which is quite good. Im quite skilled at what i do, and it actually relates to the industry. what do you do?
To continue on this trend a bit, our webapp runs on oc4j/oracle/java/unix. if the customer wants to go cheap, they deploy on linux. if they want to shell out some cash, they deploy on solaris. currently, we only have one client on windows, which is a pain, as they are the only reason we have to test on it. do you want to know why? because when you get passed the home user and small businesses, microsoft has a horrible reputation for instability and security, the two things that are essential when you are talking about a serious production environment. what ms has going for it is simplicity, that is all. and when you are talking about the kind of companies that we sell our product to, they would rather hire someone competitent and run a real os then have their production shut down by the worm of the month. people still remember sqlslammer.
last but not least, i have used aston. it is unusable for real work, as it crashes relatively frequently. and last time i used it, it didnt have a desktop. none of them do, or at least did. and aston is probably the best i have tried. and i was stuck using windows for a year at work, so i tried very, very hard to find some way to make the shell not totally and completely suck. never did. linux on the other hand, has a variety of shells to fit pretty much anyone that isnt a computer illiterate. and i would rather use flux, bbox, windowmaker, gnome, kde, or xfce any day over windows, as they all give power and flexibility that just dont exist on your platform. the only reason i can see for using windows for serious work is if you dont know how to use a computer. but hey, ive been on unix since i was 8, so what do i know?
This is not quite right – or its not right for a great many people. You have to accept that there are huge numbers of people who simply do not want to configure their systems. What they want is to write, or use the web, or archive their photos. They have a make-do attitude. You supply them with a desktop, an office suite, a collection manager, an email client, and they will do their best to adapt to it. Its these people who, when they go to the start menu, navigate their way to system configuration, and discover lots of stuff about printers they don’t have and have no intention of ever having, throw up their hands.
They are not stupid, they are not wrong, they are just users. They are like the people who just listen to music and have no interest in buying equalisers and so on. Or people who like automatic transmission cars, because they just want to get somewhere.
This is what makes distros like BeatriX, PCLinux and so on interesting. The problem one has with the comments here is that one, there is no shortage of distros for this purpose already, and two, to make one of these you absolutely do not have to rewrite a desktop environment in C. Leave aside if it is or isn’t a real project. No, the way you would improve Linux desktops for ordinary users is by the system management interface. Mandriva probably has come the furthest, but if you compare it with OSX, it still has a long way to go.
I can’t see why large choice and flexibility is not compatible with what you’re saying. Give these users good, reasonable defaults, and they won’t probably change them, if they don’t want to. But I think OSS value is in proving them much more choice and flexibility readily available (The troll above is right in saying there are a lot of windows shell replacements etc., but in my -long- windows experience they don’t add flexibility; most of the time they’re just crappy, incredibly buggy, non consistent freeware things).
discover lots of stuff about printers they don’t have and have no intention of ever having, throw up their hands
It took 4 mouse clicks to configure the network printer on the Debian box I use in my office. All with a practical, standard KDE 3.3 wizard.
What are you talking about?
“Download Mockup
Mockup 0.1.0 beta1 is not available anymore because it has some problems that we are fixing for Mockup 0.2.0.”
o.O
For me another advantage of the free and open source software is the possibility to redistribute it like you want if you respect the terms of the GNU license or another free license.
If Mockup don’t like me I can choose another distro like Debian with KDE or Gnome, we don’t obligate to use Mockup, what is the problem.
For me KDE and Gnome aren’t wrong, I use Gnome everyday and is very beautiful that more software is available (for example Pier Luigi use Vim and not Emacs to develop Mockup) but it is different in the Mockup case.
For many reasons one of the base concepts of Mockup is that there is only one application for every task that is developed by a community not a corporartion a builded and improved with the users needs, the persons who use Mockup.
In one word Mockup is FREE.
Mockup not is “vaporware” but the development is slow because only Pier Luigi work on the code and my collaboration is discontinued at this time.
The mockups are very old and and many ideas are changed I’m waiting for a bit of free time to update the site with new documentation I don’t work for a company.
Not is simple develop a different idea of free Desktop but I think that is possible.
I just think the one-tool-fits-all philosophy is wrong and dangerous. Such a desktop would depress me. I would feel in a cage -again. People are happy to try OSS when they understand OSS means more choice, not less.
That’s why I see a problem with mockup. Not with mockup itself, but with it being a symptom of a IMHO wrong approach to usability.
I just think the one-tool-fits-all philosophy is wrong and dangerous. Such a desktop would depress me. I would feel in a cage -again. People are happy to try OSS when they understand OSS means more choice, not less.
OSS means choice because you have the possibility to replace any part of it, as there is no vendor lock-in through closed source or proprietary formats.
OSS however is not about forcing choice down your throat. A simple, integrated and streamlined OS is simply another choice, which free software can and will offer.
Yes, but I’m afraid of this kind of philosophy, that’s overtaking the OSS desktop community. I particularly fear the world of Linux distributions to become a puzzle of monolithic one-size-fits-all operating systems that will allow to change their defaults only painfully.
See for example the absurdity of the existence of both Ubuntu and Kubuntu. Wouldn’t it have been better simply providing and giving the same care to the KDE and Gnome desktop on the same distro, letting the user choose it? Even a flexibile distro like Debian suffers a similar problem. I recently installed Sarge at work, and I found that’s it is not at all desktop-agnostic; it is very Gnome-centric. The default OpenOffice package ships with a Gnome skin. The Debian Gnome desktop is nicely personalized and branded, where the KDE desktop is just a plain, vanilla KDE install. This is just a bit annoying for me: I’m a KDE user but I use and like a lot of Gnome/Gtk apps. But it is symptomatic. I don’t like it. The only true agnostic distro today, after Slackware dropped Gnome, seems Gentoo to me, but that’s surely not a newbie-oriented distro.
See for example the absurdity of the existence of both Ubuntu and Kubuntu. Wouldn’t it have been better simply providing and giving the same care to the KDE and Gnome desktop on the same distro, letting the user choose it?
No. The KDE in Ubuntu is the same quality as Kubuntu (it’s the same). The work is shared, but you are not forced to make the choice. This is one of the main reasons for Ubuntu’s success and a choice you simply have to respect. It sure would be possible to create one huge release containing both the Ubuntu and Kubuntu installs, but it would not change a lot and most users probably don’t need it. You can always replace every part to your liking manually.
The only true agnostic distro today, after Slackware dropped Gnome, seems Gentoo to me, but that’s surely not a newbie-oriented distro.
Not that I really want to argue about this, but a “true agnostic newbie-oriented distro” sounds like an oxymoron to me.
The one application for every task is releated to the set of base applications to manage a simple Desktop.
Not a big tool/suite but more small integrated applications for basic tasks.
Therefore you can choose Mockup with its archive manager or Gnome with File Roller.
If the Mockup archive manager is no good you can collaborate to improve it, the duplication of resources is not synonymous of freedom.
The very dangerous question for freedom is the philosophy of some corporation that with some clever movements are using linux and the free software for the own profits.
Mockup not is a corporation but a open community.
Therefore you can choose Mockup with its archive manager or Gnome with File Roller.
That’s what’s wrong. Why do I have to choose whole environments when I can choose tools?
Let’s see the Debian desktop I’m running here at work.
Desktop: KDE
Browser: Firefox
Email client: Thunderbird
PDF reader: xpdf
Word processing: OpenOffice Writer
Spreadsheet: Gnumeric
Vector graphics: Inkscape
Raster graphics: Gimp
Instant messaging: Gaim
Latex editor: Kile
GUI Text editor: Kwrite
Multimedia: xine, xmms
See? I use almost 50:50 KDEQt tools and GnomeGTK tools, plus other tools (xpdf,xine,OO Writer). I even don’t use the same office suite for word processing and spreadsheets! Why? Beacuse I choose the tool that suits my needs best, period. For example, I think Gnumeric is much lighter and cleaner than OO Calc, retaining good .xls compatibility, IMHO, where Abiword is too buggy and has less compatibility with MS Office than OO Writer. Your mileage may vary: I’m talking of what suits best me. But I find that very rarely all a desktop environment suits all needs.
Things become even worse when there are bugs (and many OSS apps, even very good ones, are buggy. That’s not a critique, that’s obvious for every software). For example, at home I run a Gentoo where, for some obscure reason, mplayer fails to play mpegs. I could sure look out how to fix it (perhaps emerging the unstable version), but in the meantime I have xine, that I like a bit less, but that plays mpegs just fine. So two apparently redundant tools become both necessary.
If the Mockup archive manager is no good you can collaborate to improve it, the duplication of resources is not synonymous of freedom.
Sometimes it’s just bugs and features. Sometimes it’s philosophy. For example, I love xmms and xmms-like players. I hate rythmbox and amarok and all itunes-like players. I just hate their interface philosophy. If you make me stick with them, I can’t just improve them – I would substitute them.
So what seems to be redundancy is not really redundancy. For example, there is a fundamental app that has no counterpart or forks in the OSS world: The Gimp. Everyone that wants to do some decent raster graphics with OSS tools must use Gimp, there’s no true alternative to it. Using Gimp means using an interface that’s universally recognized as being one of the least friendly and usable of the OSS world. Eventually you get accustomed to it, but it’s often painful, even if there are a few that like it. Now, is it really good? Wouldn’t it be better to have at least another raster graphics program with a different interface, for example? Or even with a different philosophy behind it, and let users choose what suits them best by providing both?
The very dangerous question for freedom is the philosophy of some corporation that with some clever movements are using linux and the free software for the own profits.
Interesting, but I can’t see how it’s related to our thread…
Mockup won’t be a viable OS, and this seems to be the consensus expressed here. There’s just not enough people behind it and the project is too separatist to succeed.
However, the discussion about the elegence of the Qt4/DBUS stack is a good sign. When a real project comes out with a Qt4 desktop shell (KDE), it will be state of the art. In the scheme of things, GNOME 2.6-2.12 is the first widely deployable Linux desktop series, and KDE4 should supplant GNOME as the second killer desktop when it becomes stable.
The one thing I would like to see out of the KDE project (or some fork thereof) is an focus on slowly replacing C++ with Python as the predominant application programming language. If Trolltech continues such great work with Qt, and freedesktop keeps driving X and open standards like DBUS, the future of the Linux (and other free software) desktops is bright.
How the hell Pier Luigi gets time to code all this while while being a full time professional referee in Serie A is beyond me..
So what seems to be redundancy is not really redundancy. For example, there is a fundamental app that has no counterpart or forks in the OSS world: The Gimp. Everyone that wants to do some decent raster graphics with OSS tools must use Gimp, there’s no true alternative to it.
And that is not so true anymore. Since you already run Debian, It’s easy for you to try out Krita and see for yourself. Just try the latest Klick package of it, no need to mess up your system for a test:-)
So what seems to be redundancy is not really redundancy. For example, there is a fundamental app that has no counterpart or forks in the OSS world: The Gimp. Everyone that wants to do some decent raster graphics with OSS tools must use Gimp, there’s no true alternative to it. Using Gimp means using an interface that’s universally recognized as being one of the least friendly and usable of the OSS world. Eventually you get accustomed to it, but it’s often painful, even if there are a few that like it. Now, is it really good? Wouldn’t it be better to have at least another raster graphics program with a different interface, for example? Or even with a different philosophy behind it, and let users choose what suits them best by providing both?
There is a good alternative to gimp: Krita. It already has many of the features of the gimp and the current CVS version even supports 16-bit per channel and CMYK. It has nice drawing tools (which gimp lacks), layers, selections, some nice filters, even rudimentary support for natural media painting. Right now, Krita is not stable and complete enough to replace gimp, but it is progressing rapidly and it will eventually become the gimp for KDE (just with a nicer user interface, color space independence and some natural media painting tools like Corel painter).
Thank you all for the tip. I had heard about Krita but I wasn’t aware it was already becoming a suitable replacement. If it’s true, that’s very very good news. I will give it a try on my Gentoo at home.
If you want to try Krita, I recommend to compile the CVS version. I don’t think it is a suitable replacement for gimp yet because it is not stable enough and there are still some important things missing. But there are already a lot of features that work quite well and we are happy to receive bugreports or wishes:-)