The article does not claim Photoshop will kill GIMP. The point of the article is that software as a service (SaaS) is the trend, with more people using web-based applications instead of installing programs on their computers. The article is asking how FOSS will adapt to an SaaS market.
The
comments to the article are a different matter. They contain a lot of griping about GIMP development. And some defense of GIMP. I think it boils down to two basic questions:
1. What do FOSS developers owe to end users?
2. What do end users owe to FOSS developers?
The glib answer is, nothing. Developers can do whatever they darn well please, and users can take it or leave it. A nice, neat, libertarian approach. However, the end result would be software that's useless. Where's the benefit of that?
There needs to be give and take between users and developers. It's like dancing: one partner can take the lead, but not to the extent that someone is left abandoned alone in the middle of the dance floor... while the other partner rants about dancers who can't keep up.
I am not a programmer. What is my proper role in supporting GIMP? Is it to whine constantly about waiting for 16-bit color? Or to cheerlead every minor bugfix like it's the second coming?
Yipee it's version 2.8.927 !!!!
I think it's good to raise this issue and talk about it. All I know is, I use GIMP and I am grateful to the developers... but I can't recommend it to anyone who wants state-of-the-art photo editing. I hope this changes soon, but meanwhile I am not surprised if some people are abandoning GIMP for more up-to-date software. Closing our eyes and pretending nobody's leaving is not a good answer.