@hakui I can't believe how hard you shilled proprietary software there without getting paid, but I guess it's on me to dismantle the untrue proprietary arguments.
>the gap between krita and csp is comparable to that between gimp and photoshop
I'm not sure what you're trying to say, as GIMP is designed to be a image manipulation tool (for which there is nothing functionally better), while Krita is designed to be a general drawing tool more like photoshop.

I haven't heard of "CSP", but its featureset seems very similar to Krita - seemingly certain features are available in other free software and Krita will eventually implement all of its features.

Just because software is somewhat more convenient to use doesn't mean you should surrender your freedom and even go so far to fund the degeneracy.

>doesn't sound very free market if you are trying to prevent proprietary software from reaching the market
Proprietary software doesn't function in "the market".

Making software proprietary is attempt to prevent "the market" from happening and to only allow for a single proprietary monopoly.

>that just shows how unviable you think free software is economically that you feel you need protectionism for it lmao
For there to be a law against murder that will be enforced against known murderers is not a form of protectionism - it's a defense of what is right and just.

Proprietary software companies *will* take free software and make it proprietary and will use it to attack humanity if they can.

>that corpos decide to step in and fund their own (the unfree licenses are them making sure they'll get a return on investment
A proprietary license is used for the sole reason because corpos have a hate for humanity and society and make everything proprietary if they can and has nothing to do with investment.

If a corpo actually wants to fund their own software for their own use, they'll develop it internally and not publish it.

A proprietary license has no relevance to if they'll get a "return on investment" or not except in the negative - I'm certainly not going to pay for a copy, same as anyone who has basic respect for their own and humanities freedom (which is a return on investment they're not going to get), plus there is no guarantee that enough suckers will pay for a copy to get a return anyway.

>not have people bypassing them and building their own copy from the freely available source)
The Ardour developers are doing just fine despite how it's possible to build your own copy from the free source code; https://ardour.org/

Such kind of argument is based off pure greed and is saying something like - "How dare it be possible for people to even try out the software without ".

>yes go ahead and use the free alternative
The free software is a replacement, rather than a mere alternative.

>thinking both options are equal and that people aren't using the proprietary one because of some feature that the free one lacks is silly and dogmatic
Yes, people do often use a proprietary version because they believe that nothing else has such feature - although in many cases the free version has such feature.

Most innovative software features usually come to free software first and then proprietary software developers copy it (if the pushover license allows) or clone it - which comes after.

>name a free software that you bought instead of building from source. donations don't count
I always build software from source and as it turns out, nobody charges money for free software source code.

I will not hesitate to pay if a good free software project asks for payment via a freedom-respecting method like Monero - but really none has asked so far.

Donations do count and I have donated money to the free software foundation in exchange for the defending of freedom and releasing of free software that they do.

>if there's feature parity between two tools that isn't bound by ecosystems (unlike, eg. the Adobe) everyone will go for the free one, it's human nature to be cheap fucks
This sentence oozes immense hate for humanity.

Free means freedom and has nothing to do with price.

Obviously it would be human nature to use software that respects your freedom and is also gratis, instead of using software that shackles you and have a huge price.

An ecosystem is something that just naturally happens, which you just observe - adobe has intentionally constructed a monopoly and exercises lock-in.

Furthermore, in this case it's a good thing to be a "cheap fuck and refuse to pay an aggressor that will take that money and use it to attack humanity.


>if people are still willing to buy csp instead of downloading krita then maybe there's something csp has that krita doesn't? hmmm could it be the freehand vector brush that allows people to do lineart they can correct later on?
I'm pretty sure there was a freehand vector brush added in 4.0 (https://docs.krita.org/en/user_manual/vector_graphics.html), but if not, I'm pretty sure there's one in Inkscape.

Oh nooooo, you have to do the lineart in inkscape first, then import it into Krita for later correction, how inconvenient!

>or the posable drawing doll you can throw in to reference poses directly?
You can import a posable drawing doll into Blender and apply reference poses - how inconvenient that you can just use a photo of the doll on its own layer instead!

>or the manga panel layout presets?
I believe that is already implemented - there are comic templates when you start a new canvas, plus a square tool, plus a startup option.

If that isn't suitable, you can just download a template file of the wanted manga panel layout - how inconvenient!

>no clearly it's because people hate freedom
As those are just a handful minor convenience features, if you throw your freedom and also money against yourself because of it, you do indeed hate freedom.

Looking at the "csp" prices on their website - for all of those features to be implemented, 20 people at most would need to put forward slightly less money than that for a Krita programmer to implement such before what they feel like implementing.

>yet most servers run linux in spite of MS' shenanigans, because people appreciate its stability compared to windows.
Most servers run GNU/Linux, because people appreciate how good GNU software and libraries is at working - how Linux is reasonably stable is a secondary appreciation.

>iunno, i'm an artist and i found the vector brush pretty neat. are you an artist? nope
I have drawn before and I have found free drawing software very pleasing and easy to use.