I just installed Pinta to check it out. That implementation is just bad, you are not supposed to just migrate your menu bar into submenus under the hamburger menu.

If I were to assist with their design, I would eliminate everything that already has a headerbar icon or an on-screen affordance; so most of Files, Edit, View, and Layers is taken care of.

The stuff that remains:

- Quit: superfluous, not present in Gnome apps

- View: borrow the Ephiphany (gnome-web) zoom controls, move Grid, Show/Hide, and Ruler units into a preferences dialog

- Add-ins: Move to a preferences dialog

- Window is useless, they have tabs

- Help can stay

So no surprise that the laziest implementation of a hamburger menu is not good.

▲

pndy 4 days ago | parent [-]

It's kinda funny how Pinta changed while Paint.NET remains same with just minor tweaks to the interface. Luckily devs there never considered utilizing ribbon interface...

In the end I swapped from Pinta to Gimp and Krita because I couldn't stand that interface

	▲	dminik 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		Tbh, at this point I would pay for paint.NET on Linux. Pinta is interesting, but the UI is terrible. Did we really have to remove the resize handles? They're there when adding shapes, but not when manipulating pixels/selection? Half the options I need being hidden in a hamburger menu isn't great either. Gimp is gimp. I don't need Photoshop. And I don't want a Photoshop level of a learning curve. Krita is interesting, but it seems to be aimed at drawing. I struggled to copy the color code from an image. By default my eyes are drawn to the massive advanced color selector on the right, but it's a trap. You actually need the tiny color selector in the top bar. It shouldn't be this hard. I need a subset of image manipulation features in my work and each tool has a different one.