...

Of course it would be better! So, are you doing it already? When can we expect to see the unsinkability option for utility windows in, say, KDE?

Well, you're using KDE not me ;)

Like I said, Gimp has a much higher profile than us currently. If you push the KDE people they're more likely to listen. We have plans to push for that too, but our main priority is to roll out a program that WORKS NOW. This includes unsinkable dialogs, too.

...

...

The A4 rectangle in the canvas window is horribly disturbing.

It helps me, but you can switch it off easily. In a next version this preference will be saved for future sessions.

How about choosing "new" and set A4 to open up an image window, the edges of which would determine the size of the image, that is A4? The rulers would then copy the image size.

Have you ever worked with any commercial vector editor? They ALL have paper size shown by edges on the canvas, and they all allow to draw both within the paper and outside. That's standard.

...

No, WiW is secondary. The biggest problem with Gimp is that dialogs sink. They never do in any Windows or Mac program I've EVER seen.

:)

No it's not. The problem with sinking dialogs comes from the WiW/separate issue. See below.

What I am trying to do is to show you that sinking/unsinking dialogs are orthogonal to the WiW. And I'm using Inkscape to demonstrate that. Inkscape has no WiW but its dialogs are unsinkable.

...

Besides, what's the purpose of having the main toolbox on the left

while having the other one on the top? It makes no sense.

...

It makes perfect sence as they are the primary and secondary toolbars, directly linked (change tool on the primary and get all relevant controls on the secondary). This is the approach taken by (at least) Photoshop and Xara, and it's very convenient.

Please compare the following images.

http://www.suse.de/en/private/products/suse_linux/winerack/images/photoshop.... http://www.pleasewipeyourfeet.com/webtest/pr/gimp.jpg

Do you really think that having a subtoolbox above the primary toolbox makes any sense? Have you ever seen trees organized bottom-up?

It may be surprising for you, but it's very convenient. Photoshop users were raging when this secondary toolbox appeared (in version 6 I think). Xara is considered one of the most convenient and usable vector app by most people who have ever used it, and it had such a secondary toolbox from the start.

See how many options gimp provides for the brushtool. How would you fit them in the top toolbar?

Plenty of options is not necessarily an advantage. They may be distracting.

As for your example:

- First, some of the brush options are very unlikely to be needed every time you use brush, and therefore should be removed into an options dialog tab for this tool.

- Second, I do indeed think that even all of the Gimp brush tools on your screenshot can be put into a horizontal toolbar without problems.

- Third, this actually does not matter - your Tool options is worse NOT because it's not horizontal but because it sinks and grabs focus and clutters taskbar. If it didn't (i.e. if it was transient as are dialogs in Inkscape, or dockable into a document window), the difference between a tool options dialog and our secondary toolbar would not amount to much because both switch their content when you change tools (which is the main point of having such a dialog).

Regarding dialog sinking which you've never seen on any windows/mac app, to be honest i haven't used PS for a *long* time, just guessing from the screenshot - the toolbox and docks, how do they behave if you maximise the image window? Are they always on top?

OF COURSE!!!

Moreover, MOST people work in Photoshop with their images maximized. This would be impossible if palettes didn't stay on top. And it's pretty much impossible in Gimp for the same reason.

Can you hide them so that all space on screen belongs to the image window?

Yes, easily, just press Tab to toggle all palettes on or off. In Inkscape, we plan to use the ` key for the same because Tab is taken.

It's all the same thing except - if you minimise PS you minimise all,

All including dialogs. Believe me, it's a huge difference in usability.

but you end up having a mess on the bottom of the main window when minimising separate images. Subtle differences between WiW and non-WiW.

I repeat, I don't care about WiW. In fact I like documents in separate windows better, and Inkscape is going to stay that way. What we're speaking about is the behavior of dialogs, not document windows.

BTW Seems like Xara isn't available anymore, just checked the corel site, or is there any other company providing the sw?

See a screenshot:

http://www.xara.com/press/graphics/xarax/screenshots/firestorm.jpg

This is default interface, pretty cluttered, but in daily work you can easily remove all the toolbars under the menu except the bottom one. That's the secondary toolbar whose content switches as you switch tools. As you can see, quite a lot of options there (shown for the selector tool), all very compact and convenient.

...

...

As for the transients - as long as 1.) the toolbox and the docks all behave like one group(for the purpose of minimising, bringing forward, always on top etc), and making the image window active switches the images/layers/channels/paths/ dock to that image, it will do a much better job than WiW has ever done. the images should always be kept as separate objects/windows.

Exactly! This is _precisely_ what we're doing in Inkscape and what Gimp refuses to do.

I don't think so. :)

What are you denying? That your description precisely fits the current Inkscape interface? DOwnload the CVS and see for yourself. That Gimp flatly refuses to use transients in the same way? Ask Sven and you'll hear for yourself :)

...

I ran the new Gimp and saw severe usability problems at once. You say they can be fixed by changing preferences? Great! But first, not everything can be fixed, and the biggest problem - sinking dialogs - is unfixable.

Bulia, the main problem is that you're approaching it with destructive criticism:

"I ran gimp for the *first* time and *immidiatelly saw* problems A, B, C which are unsolvable"

Hey, I did not call them unsolvable until Sven confirmed that :)

Awwww, c'mon!

the problem with sinking dialogs or transients or whatever doesn't lie in the gimp domain, it lies in the freedesktop domain, the freedesktop proposal should enforce certain rules on Wm for apps like gimp, which are not WiW. If that it isn't implemented yet, is that a real problem?

Of course it is. Users need usable programs NOW. Until there are other widely supported ways to achieve the same goal, we'll use transients.