This really isn’t the article it wishes it were :-\ It kinda reeks of “I’ve picked a thing I want to argue and now I’m going to make up an argument for it” down to admitting that good sources aren’t available (which makes me wonder whether there are no good sources at all or just no good sources that support the author’s argument).
Bonus unpoints for the BDSM reference, just because I hate seeing that term held up as a negative or scary kind of thing and I feel like and/or choose to believe that’s the point in such an unprofessional article, rather than simply meaning “Look, it means sex stuff and that’s unprofessional.” So there. Nyeh! 😝
Also, I don’t think I’ve ever heard anyone who actually used or contributed to the GIMP (or intended to) complain about the name. I’m interested in seeing some actual data on that, if there is any. Personally I wouldn’t particularly mind a name change but I can’t say whether it’d get more attention and interest than it’d lose to irritating people accustomed to the current one.
As far as the article goes, the word gimp isn’t necessarily seen as problematic because of its sexual reference but rather as a derogatory term for disabled people. And just because many people agree that they don’t care, doesn’t mean we shouldn’t care. Democratic decisions fall flat when they deal with issues of minorities. The large majority of people doesn’t care about disabled people. So basing ethical considerations on the majority’s opinion is really no good idea. Same goes for other discriminatory language and slurs where always the same arguments are presented. I think the article does a great job of portraying the gatekeeping biases of such discussions.
Idunno where you got the idea that I’m for slurs or against disabled people but it’s kinda insulting, especially when you took “sometimes said as a derogatory word” and ran it like it’s the whole point or the article over the complaint that got its own paragraph (the Pulp Fiction bit) and shared the same sentence the disability bit is in, or the one that got the whole rest of the article (that it’s vaguely unprofessional). In fact I’m getting more irked every time I go look for evidence that I’ve misinterpreted it. Reading through a couple crap anecdotes to one that actually says something, we get a VP smirking at the name, which makes me wonder whether that person’s just a hateful prick smirking at a disability term or one of the many who giggle at any reference to anything associated with sex. The other three are just “some people dislike the name.” I conclude that the article does not take issue primarily with the name being an abusive term and wonder why you’d say that.
I muchly dislike careless use of abusive terms (I’ve probably got an essay or two ranting over the usage (and existence) of “crazy” and “insane,” for example) so I really don’t disagree that abusive terms should be treated much more seriously.
My entire point was that the author seems to be throwing things at the wall hoping something sticks, not seriously worrying some spooky scary BDSM critter (hi, it’s me :3 ) is gonna tie them up (of course not, the ropes are for me :3 ), nor that anyone’s getting bullied by the tool’s name or it’s irritating old wounds or really anything at all. I don’t think they’re taking any of this seriously. If the term’s abusive in a way that can’t be neutralized by taking it from abusers and making it something else (an arguably valid thing to do) then that’s worth actual serious discussion and not just part of one sentence in a six-page essay.
tl;dr: The article barely even mentions anything about disability and, I think, does so more as an excuse for itself than out of any serious concern for anyone. My complaint/point is, to be clear, exclusively that the article is crap and not that abusive terminology is okay. The article has failed to demonstrate any actual problem with the name itself other than handwavey “some people say” that it’s vaguely unprofessional.
Fair points, you’re certainly right about the lack in quality of the article. And I totally get why you feel offended by something with a sexual or even bdsm connotation immediately being considered derogatory or scary. I think this is really a counterproductive statement for someone to make if they wanted to talk about offensive language. Shaming sexual deviancies is offensive in of itself.
Literally the only times I’ve heard anybody say anything about it was basically when they first learn about it and giggle for a few minutes, then get on with their lives.
I think the only way the name could be any sort of issue was if they were explicitly trying to be “family friendly,” which would imply that it’s intended for either christian mothers or advertisers (we all know how the children feel about sex jokes), which, since this is Lemmy and we’re talking about FOSS software, I’m sure I don’t have to explain why that’s a stupid idea.
To add to this, I’ve been using GIMP on and off for a decade and I’ve never given any thought to the name. It’s all capitalized. I didn’t think it was a backronym, I thought it was just an acronym.
I’ve used this in professional settings (I used to work in academic molecular bio), and I was very evangelical about it. Especially because we’re not doing high-level artistic work, we just sometimes need something for processing microscope images or making graphics for scientific publications.
I’d say to any and everyone, “You know, you don’t have to pay an annual subscription fee for Photoshop: there’s this free, open-source program called GIMP that does most of what you need and you don’t have to pay a thing! Want me to install it for you?”
I didn’t even think to be embarrassed about the name, and no one ever seemed to care in conversation. As others have said, the bigger impediments are people’s attachment to commercial software and interface challenges. This is just an absolutely silly complaint to make.
the author of the article wrote an article a while ago about how they think steam is enshittifying and becoming bad because they got rid of mac support and some people didn’t like steam in the 2000s, so I think this person just takes controversial opinions randomly and writes about them.
Gimp issue is not the name, it’s the outdated UI and the dumb usage decisions like saving only in it’s format. I moved to krita some years ago and I think that’s the future. Gimp will still be along for a long time, and it should as its a great piece of software. Bit that’s it.
Alternatives are good, and having krita and gimp is good.
Gimp name? Never even occurred to me that could be offensive. Not American here. Americans, get out of your asses (joking)… You are often offensive to the world but you don’t care (not so much joking, and ofc I am wrong in generalization), so why should the others?
I never knew the word was used as a slur or had sexual connotations. I thought it was a verb akin to “nerf” or “cripple”, as in “Windows 11 gimped the taskbar functionality.” I guess this word is still bad, as I want to enhance, not “gimp,” my pictures.
Krita has mostly left GIMP in the dust, as far as UI and basic tools. The brush engine and ability to handle large files is so much better. It’s vector and text tools need work, and so do the image filters and such. Even so, Krita destroys GIMP. Even the name, which isn’t great, is leagues better.
easy enough to resolve, since the G stands for GNU just pronounce it the same as that, and since GNU stands for GNU’S not UNIX, it pronounces G the same as GNU, which pronounces G the same as GNU, which pronounces G the same as GNU, which pronounces G the same as GNU, which pronounces G the same as GNU
The name holds it back more than you know. No EP or AD wants to put “The GIMP” on their software list for a project. I have to have a conversation with someone ensuring we’re good on all our licenses, and they ask, “What is this GIMP thing?” Answering it makes me sound like an unprofessional jackass. The company would rather just pay Adobe.
I don’t even want to tell people I use it because of its name. I would never bring it up in a work setting in this day and age when I look at Slack and see everyone list their pronouns.
The fact they haven’t clued into this is just wild to me. A shame it throws the work of so many people under the bus.
Also, to call it after the Pulp Fiction character is insane to me. Let alone that everyone on the team signed off on it. What were the second choices? Diarrhea? Herpes? Like dafuq.
Or some edgelord trying to get people to watch 2 girls 1 cup back in the day. The scene in the movie was deeply disturbing. It actually made my partner at the time cry because she had been SAed before. Even for me, I did not enjoy and while the movie was amazing, the scene only took away from the film (I know the entire thing was hyper violent and disturbing).
I can’t even imagine referring to it let alone thinking back on it fondly. I always thought GIMP was an acronym. This news shook me because I’m actually on the contributor list.
Also, I would never admit its origin in this day and age. I’m still in shock learning this!
Most of the world does not have English as a first language and thus the meaning of the word “gimp” is not widely known. Personally I do agree that the name is dumb, but it’s a very English as a first language issue. My daughter is learning to do basic stuff with GIMP in school because it’s free. The name is not an issue because nobody knows what a gimp is.
I’ll use the cliche meme of “I was today years old when I learned where the name comes from”. Just made the connection when I read this article, and I love Pulp Fiction.
But I too am not a native English speaker. Just always accepted the clunky acronym as the reason for the name.
I guess you can’t quantify how much the name has helped it. How many people remember it because of its quirky name. Without knowing both numbers it’s hard to know if it’s a net positive or negative.
No one. No one remembers it fondly because it’s got a “quirky” name. That’s not how software works. People use software because it’s useful. Not because it’s edgy or has memorable branding. I would rather a competent design tool period. The name is irrelevant. We aren’t selling cookies or an energy drink. We are empowering people to get things done. You think your spoon with a hole in it is going to sell because you call it “Faggot”?
Surely anyone who feels that it’s an urgent problem can make a fork which is fully identical in every way except for the logo and name and branding
Since the amount of effort that would be required for that would be infinitesimal compared to what was already done to make the software
And then produce all these good things which you say are being held back
Or, wait, did you mean you wanted someone else to do that because you feel that it’s super important enough to insist that someone else should do it but not important enough to do yourself?
As I recall someone made the same lame argument about the name being divisive, a fork was created called Glimpse and it fell on its face not long after it was formed.
Things like this are a waste of energy, nobody cares that it’s called gimp.
Yeah, I mean glimpse seems fine; in general it seems completely fine if someone says “hey I think this is a problem for some percent of people who have weird priorities in life because they are corporate or weird thinking, I support the idea to solve it and make a friendly name for them”
It’s just that if the response is “yeah that percent of people are not our problem, we just want to make this project and we did, thank you and good day”, then you need to be able to say “ok I will make the fork to fix it then” instead of writing up a big blog post demanding that they need to obey you on what your opinion of the priorities for their own project should be.
I mean, just because you don’t care doesn’t mean nobody does.
If I was running a school where students with physical challenges attended, I would not feel comfortable asking them to use software called Gimp, so I would just avoid it.
That said, I would avoid it anyways in favor of Krita, I’m just saying.
Plenty of words have multiple meanings, but I rarely think of them when I’m using a word to mean a specific thing. I know the meanings of gimp, but I never think of them when using GIMP; perhaps because it’s capitalized and I always assumed it stood for something (and it does).
But anyway, and more importantly than that, what you describe is a problem that you might run into with any word.
A small subset of the world population can view it as an insult, but for the vast majority it means nothing. Sort of like the word “negro” in Spanish, which some English people take offense to when they hear it. I even searched “gimp” in 3 different search engines, and the first 2 to 5 results were always the GIMP. Most people have no other concept for the word.
Let me put it this way: you say you’d favor Kira, but how do you know that there aren’t some kids in Egypt, or Russia, or someone else in the world, that take offense to the word “Kira”?
I understand. You are correct that, in the right context, pretty much any word can be offensive or insulting to someone. So I consider it my responsibility, once I am aware of this context, to try to be inclusive because I like to have as diverse a group of people around me as possible, it builds strength.
So if “Krita” ended up being derogatory to Russians or Egyptians or whatever, I would absolutely be cautious about that, yes. Especially if I was working with kids.
Off course, that’s fair. This was a while ago, but I believe my point was more generally about whether to rename an existing popular application. I think it’s commendable that you make that effort to protect the kids you work with.
The problem is considerably smaller if you consider that the software is used by a lot more people than English speakers (both L1 and L2+). For these, “gimp” is not some sex stuff, but rather that critter chewing on a brush. And even for L2+, the word “gimp” is often missing from our vocabs.
As others said in this thread, the actual problem holding GIMP back is called user interface. It has improved, but it’s still awful.
I am not a native speaker and I never associated gimp with a sex meaning, even if my vocabulary is pretty expanded.
It could be called “DesirePix 2.0” or “SeductionStudio 4.0” but the main problem is that it gives a worse user experience than using Adobe Photoshop 5.0 on windows 95, on every single aspect. Features, speed, UI, ease of use, and so on
Disclaimer: it’s not that I’m denigrating the devs, making a program like gimp is super fucking hard and as a lousy programmer I could never be able to make it better. Ideally, it would need some talented designers to develop a more usable UI.
I see comparisons to photopea, but that’s a UI clone of Photoshop and that is not really wanted. It also didn’t come with technical debt from the 90s
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !technology@beehaw.org
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
I just use Photopea https://www.photopea.com/ instead. It does everything I need, and I don’t need to install anything.
Libre Graphics Manipulation App
LiGMA.
Deez GNUs
Figma Execs: What’s LiGMA?
This really isn’t the article it wishes it were :-\ It kinda reeks of “I’ve picked a thing I want to argue and now I’m going to make up an argument for it” down to admitting that good sources aren’t available (which makes me wonder whether there are no good sources at all or just no good sources that support the author’s argument).
Bonus unpoints for the BDSM reference, just because I hate seeing that term held up as a negative or scary kind of thing and I feel like and/or choose to believe that’s the point in such an unprofessional article, rather than simply meaning “Look, it means sex stuff and that’s unprofessional.” So there. Nyeh! 😝
Also, I don’t think I’ve ever heard anyone who actually used or contributed to the GIMP (or intended to) complain about the name. I’m interested in seeing some actual data on that, if there is any. Personally I wouldn’t particularly mind a name change but I can’t say whether it’d get more attention and interest than it’d lose to irritating people accustomed to the current one.
As far as the article goes, the word gimp isn’t necessarily seen as problematic because of its sexual reference but rather as a derogatory term for disabled people. And just because many people agree that they don’t care, doesn’t mean we shouldn’t care. Democratic decisions fall flat when they deal with issues of minorities. The large majority of people doesn’t care about disabled people. So basing ethical considerations on the majority’s opinion is really no good idea. Same goes for other discriminatory language and slurs where always the same arguments are presented. I think the article does a great job of portraying the gatekeeping biases of such discussions.
Idunno where you got the idea that I’m for slurs or against disabled people but it’s kinda insulting, especially when you took “sometimes said as a derogatory word” and ran it like it’s the whole point or the article over the complaint that got its own paragraph (the Pulp Fiction bit) and shared the same sentence the disability bit is in, or the one that got the whole rest of the article (that it’s vaguely unprofessional). In fact I’m getting more irked every time I go look for evidence that I’ve misinterpreted it. Reading through a couple crap anecdotes to one that actually says something, we get a VP smirking at the name, which makes me wonder whether that person’s just a hateful prick smirking at a disability term or one of the many who giggle at any reference to anything associated with sex. The other three are just “some people dislike the name.” I conclude that the article does not take issue primarily with the name being an abusive term and wonder why you’d say that.
I muchly dislike careless use of abusive terms (I’ve probably got an essay or two ranting over the usage (and existence) of “crazy” and “insane,” for example) so I really don’t disagree that abusive terms should be treated much more seriously.
My entire point was that the author seems to be throwing things at the wall hoping something sticks, not seriously worrying some spooky scary BDSM critter (hi, it’s me :3 ) is gonna tie them up (of course not, the ropes are for me :3 ), nor that anyone’s getting bullied by the tool’s name or it’s irritating old wounds or really anything at all. I don’t think they’re taking any of this seriously. If the term’s abusive in a way that can’t be neutralized by taking it from abusers and making it something else (an arguably valid thing to do) then that’s worth actual serious discussion and not just part of one sentence in a six-page essay.
tl;dr: The article barely even mentions anything about disability and, I think, does so more as an excuse for itself than out of any serious concern for anyone. My complaint/point is, to be clear, exclusively that the article is crap and not that abusive terminology is okay. The article has failed to demonstrate any actual problem with the name itself other than handwavey “some people say” that it’s vaguely unprofessional.
Fair points, you’re certainly right about the lack in quality of the article. And I totally get why you feel offended by something with a sexual or even bdsm connotation immediately being considered derogatory or scary. I think this is really a counterproductive statement for someone to make if they wanted to talk about offensive language. Shaming sexual deviancies is offensive in of itself.
Literally the only times I’ve heard anybody say anything about it was basically when they first learn about it and giggle for a few minutes, then get on with their lives.
I think the only way the name could be any sort of issue was if they were explicitly trying to be “family friendly,” which would imply that it’s intended for either christian mothers or advertisers (we all know how the children feel about sex jokes), which, since this is Lemmy and we’re talking about FOSS software, I’m sure I don’t have to explain why that’s a stupid idea.
Or, you know, a school. You know, where there are children? Maybe children who have physical limitations who have been called gimps?
Oh well, who cares about the educational environment and getting kids exposed to FOSS options instead of commercial software?
To add to this, I’ve been using GIMP on and off for a decade and I’ve never given any thought to the name. It’s all capitalized. I didn’t think it was a backronym, I thought it was just an acronym.
I’ve used this in professional settings (I used to work in academic molecular bio), and I was very evangelical about it. Especially because we’re not doing high-level artistic work, we just sometimes need something for processing microscope images or making graphics for scientific publications.
I’d say to any and everyone, “You know, you don’t have to pay an annual subscription fee for Photoshop: there’s this free, open-source program called GIMP that does most of what you need and you don’t have to pay a thing! Want me to install it for you?”
I didn’t even think to be embarrassed about the name, and no one ever seemed to care in conversation. As others have said, the bigger impediments are people’s attachment to commercial software and interface challenges. This is just an absolutely silly complaint to make.
the author of the article wrote an article a while ago about how they think steam is enshittifying and becoming bad because they got rid of mac support and some people didn’t like steam in the 2000s, so I think this person just takes controversial opinions randomly and writes about them.
Full name is GNUIMP anyway
Allow me to interject for a moment
I know, I know, it’s pronounced “Nyïmp”
Gimp issue is not the name, it’s the outdated UI and the dumb usage decisions like saving only in it’s format. I moved to krita some years ago and I think that’s the future. Gimp will still be along for a long time, and it should as its a great piece of software. Bit that’s it.
Alternatives are good, and having krita and gimp is good.
Gimp name? Never even occurred to me that could be offensive. Not American here. Americans, get out of your asses (joking)… You are often offensive to the world but you don’t care (not so much joking, and ofc I am wrong in generalization), so why should the others?
The word gimp in disability circles once upon a time meant “generally impaired.”
I never knew the word was used as a slur or had sexual connotations. I thought it was a verb akin to “nerf” or “cripple”, as in “Windows 11 gimped the taskbar functionality.” I guess this word is still bad, as I want to enhance, not “gimp,” my pictures.
Krita has mostly left GIMP in the dust, as far as UI and basic tools. The brush engine and ability to handle large files is so much better. It’s vector and text tools need work, and so do the image filters and such. Even so, Krita destroys GIMP. Even the name, which isn’t great, is leagues better.
Curious. I always imagined it was a reference to the folklore create ‘Imp’.
GNU Image Manipulation Program (or Project)
deleted by creator
The simple solution is to change it to a BSD license and call it BLIMP
I have no stake in this, but maybe just drop the ‘p’?
GIM avoids the slur but is still very close to the current name.
Plus as an added bonus we can have the ‘gif’ pronunciation disagreement!
The good old JNU licence.
Just like the good old Jraphics Interchange Format!
The great JFEGs of our time
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
GIRAFFE GIRAFFE GIRAFFE GIRAFFE GIRAFFE GIRAFFE GIRAFFE GIRAFFE GIRAFFE GIRAFFE GIRAFFE GIRAFFE GIRAFFE
easy enough to resolve, since the G stands for GNU just pronounce it the same as that, and since GNU stands for GNU’S not UNIX, it pronounces G the same as GNU, which pronounces G the same as GNU, which pronounces G the same as GNU, which pronounces G the same as GNU, which pronounces G the same as GNU
JNU
Plus they could announce the rebrand by replacing the weird dog chewing on a brush with the same weird dog lifting weights
Hitting the GIM.
Lifting brushes
Brushes with bellpeppers attached to them
I dig it!
If it wasn’t for StarOffice/OpenOffice/LibreOffice Impress, is have thought a rename to Impress would be a good name.
Digital Image Editor
GNU Raster Editing Program - GREP
Graphical Image Tool - GIT
Photo Editing with Raster Layers - PERL
Visual Image Manipulator - VIM
I love them all! Here a fork from one of your suggestions:
“Hey, can you recommend a good free photoshop alternative?”
“DIE!”
The name holds it back more than you know. No EP or AD wants to put “The GIMP” on their software list for a project. I have to have a conversation with someone ensuring we’re good on all our licenses, and they ask, “What is this GIMP thing?” Answering it makes me sound like an unprofessional jackass. The company would rather just pay Adobe.
I don’t even want to tell people I use it because of its name. I would never bring it up in a work setting in this day and age when I look at Slack and see everyone list their pronouns.
The fact they haven’t clued into this is just wild to me. A shame it throws the work of so many people under the bus.
Also, to call it after the Pulp Fiction character is insane to me. Let alone that everyone on the team signed off on it. What were the second choices? Diarrhea? Herpes? Like dafuq.
It reeks of 12 year old boy saying “FART” to make his friends laugh
Or some edgelord trying to get people to watch 2 girls 1 cup back in the day. The scene in the movie was deeply disturbing. It actually made my partner at the time cry because she had been SAed before. Even for me, I did not enjoy and while the movie was amazing, the scene only took away from the film (I know the entire thing was hyper violent and disturbing).
I can’t even imagine referring to it let alone thinking back on it fondly. I always thought GIMP was an acronym. This news shook me because I’m actually on the contributor list.
Also, I would never admit its origin in this day and age. I’m still in shock learning this!
Most of the world does not have English as a first language and thus the meaning of the word “gimp” is not widely known. Personally I do agree that the name is dumb, but it’s a very English as a first language issue. My daughter is learning to do basic stuff with GIMP in school because it’s free. The name is not an issue because nobody knows what a gimp is.
I’ll use the cliche meme of “I was today years old when I learned where the name comes from”. Just made the connection when I read this article, and I love Pulp Fiction.
But I too am not a native English speaker. Just always accepted the clunky acronym as the reason for the name.
This. No amount of excuses or lengthy explanations. It’s childish and unprofessional.
I guess you can’t quantify how much the name has helped it. How many people remember it because of its quirky name. Without knowing both numbers it’s hard to know if it’s a net positive or negative.
Meanwhile I still don’t know what gimp is besides it being a graphics software.
A gimp is any of the following:
The last three I got from the internet.
Gimp is a slur for people with physical disabilities in the UK at least
Same in Canada and the US. If someone calls you a gimp, it’s a derogatory term that belittles your physical abilities.
It’s kinda a slur in the US in the sense that people claim it’s a slur, but I’ve never heard anyone actually use it that way.
Ok, now the name is actually weird.
“Eww, like the coarser thread which forms the outline of the design in some lacemaking techniques!? That is just a bit gross don’t you think?”
No one. No one remembers it fondly because it’s got a “quirky” name. That’s not how software works. People use software because it’s useful. Not because it’s edgy or has memorable branding. I would rather a competent design tool period. The name is irrelevant. We aren’t selling cookies or an energy drink. We are empowering people to get things done. You think your spoon with a hole in it is going to sell because you call it “Faggot”?
It should be renamed to GLIMPSE. Gnu/Linux Image Manipulation Program Special Edition
I liked GLIDE, which was suggested a few years ago, though I can’t remember what the acronym was now
There was a fork of gimp with this name, but sadly abandoned
https://www.geeksmint.com/glimpse-a-fork-of-the-gimp/
YES! 👏👏
Surely anyone who feels that it’s an urgent problem can make a fork which is fully identical in every way except for the logo and name and branding
Since the amount of effort that would be required for that would be infinitesimal compared to what was already done to make the software
And then produce all these good things which you say are being held back
Or, wait, did you mean you wanted someone else to do that because you feel that it’s super important enough to insist that someone else should do it but not important enough to do yourself?
As I recall someone made the same lame argument about the name being divisive, a fork was created called Glimpse and it fell on its face not long after it was formed. Things like this are a waste of energy, nobody cares that it’s called gimp.
“GNU Laughably-Insecure Manipulator Prohibit Sexy Energy”?
I didn’t name it xD
Judging from this thread a lot of people care.
Yeah, I mean glimpse seems fine; in general it seems completely fine if someone says “hey I think this is a problem for some percent of people who have weird priorities in life because they are corporate or weird thinking, I support the idea to solve it and make a friendly name for them”
It’s just that if the response is “yeah that percent of people are not our problem, we just want to make this project and we did, thank you and good day”, then you need to be able to say “ok I will make the fork to fix it then” instead of writing up a big blog post demanding that they need to obey you on what your opinion of the priorities for their own project should be.
I mean, just because you don’t care doesn’t mean nobody does.
If I was running a school where students with physical challenges attended, I would not feel comfortable asking them to use software called Gimp, so I would just avoid it.
That said, I would avoid it anyways in favor of Krita, I’m just saying.
Plenty of words have multiple meanings, but I rarely think of them when I’m using a word to mean a specific thing. I know the meanings of gimp, but I never think of them when using GIMP; perhaps because it’s capitalized and I always assumed it stood for something (and it does).
But anyway, and more importantly than that, what you describe is a problem that you might run into with any word.
A small subset of the world population can view it as an insult, but for the vast majority it means nothing. Sort of like the word “negro” in Spanish, which some English people take offense to when they hear it. I even searched “gimp” in 3 different search engines, and the first 2 to 5 results were always the GIMP. Most people have no other concept for the word.
Let me put it this way: you say you’d favor Kira, but how do you know that there aren’t some kids in Egypt, or Russia, or someone else in the world, that take offense to the word “Kira”?
I understand. You are correct that, in the right context, pretty much any word can be offensive or insulting to someone. So I consider it my responsibility, once I am aware of this context, to try to be inclusive because I like to have as diverse a group of people around me as possible, it builds strength.
So if “Krita” ended up being derogatory to Russians or Egyptians or whatever, I would absolutely be cautious about that, yes. Especially if I was working with kids.
Off course, that’s fair. This was a while ago, but I believe my point was more generally about whether to rename an existing popular application. I think it’s commendable that you make that effort to protect the kids you work with.
The problem is considerably smaller if you consider that the software is used by a lot more people than English speakers (both L1 and L2+). For these, “gimp” is not some sex stuff, but rather that critter chewing on a brush. And even for L2+, the word “gimp” is often missing from our vocabs.
As others said in this thread, the actual problem holding GIMP back is called user interface. It has improved, but it’s still awful.
Agree with this
I am not a native speaker and I never associated gimp with a sex meaning, even if my vocabulary is pretty expanded.
It could be called “DesirePix 2.0” or “SeductionStudio 4.0” but the main problem is that it gives a worse user experience than using Adobe Photoshop 5.0 on windows 95, on every single aspect. Features, speed, UI, ease of use, and so on
Disclaimer: it’s not that I’m denigrating the devs, making a program like gimp is super fucking hard and as a lousy programmer I could never be able to make it better. Ideally, it would need some talented designers to develop a more usable UI.
I see comparisons to photopea, but that’s a UI clone of Photoshop and that is not really wanted. It also didn’t come with technical debt from the 90s