Can’t wait for that one!
Ok, I took a look, so here is my opinion:
First about the slogan: ‘Ormr eats Photoshops for breakfast. :)’
Thanks to the smiley, it is obvious that it was a joke. Otherwise it would be a lie, of course.
I made several tests, looking for PS alternatives. With including all the features, PS has no alternatives. Period.
I completely agree with the opinions that PS not really evolves. I completely agree that Adobe is like Autodesk with 3ds Max.
But I would like to point on the fact, that if PS hasn’t evolved since 2000, than what the competitors did in the last 14 years?
'Cause none of them were able to get close to a 14 years old app like PS. And it is a fact, too.
For my personal favor I recommend Serif Photoplus as a lightweight PS replacement (Serif makes discounts regularly, could be bought about 30-35 EUR) . Of course it has ton’s of missing features, too (as an example, there is no CMYK color space).
ORMR specific thoughts (do not take it as an offense, please):
- The GUI is terrible. I’m not surprised, most of the developers have no GUI design skills. Sorry for that, but it is a fact.
The basic rule to follow on creating GUIs is this: use the industrial standard implementations (menu/function names, locations, etc.) if you are not 100000% sure that your GUI is better. And ask an expert before making a decision.
It is very important to understand that the GUI is what the user sees first and then - if decides to use the app - the GUI will makes his/her life easy or not on performing the specific tasks.
- Channel support sucks on TGAs, compared to PS (that is true for almost every app I tested before).
Anyways: it would be great to have a real PS alternative, but it is a long way.
Saying that GUI is terrible without any actual examples makes your comment worthless. What exactly the devs should take away? That they must scrap their GUI and make a carbon copy of photoshop so that you would be familiar with it?
EDIT: While I have some issues with UI here and there, its too soon to downright say its “terrible”.
Fun message: “Thank you for submitting your report. We’ll resume crashing now.” If they keep that sort of good humour they just may make it out of beta. 
Dear Bloodwork,
I made some other comments, too.
About the GUI:
Bad color scheme (visibility problems), oversized icons and text (wasted workspace), too much scrolling for setting up parameters (unefficient workflow), unnecessary redundant infos (check the sliders)…
As far as I know I never used the word ‘terrible’ for things that are new and innovative. I use it only when we already have seen better implementations.
So going back to my post: if it is not 10000% better than the existing best solution, then using ‘carbon copy’ is the way to go and offering better functionality what could make the actual product better (I don’t involve the price tag for now).
I miss Aldus Freehand so much. Probably the best vector tool ever made imo. Freaking Adobe.
I’ve already cast my lot with Pixelmator, as frustrating as the Ui on that is sometimes, it’s pretty good. The screenshots or Ormr seem to indicate something pretty good but I’ll just hold off until it matures a bit.
It’s in beta so I expect the UI to be a bit underdeveloped while they get their house in order. From the screenshots, the UI seems pretty standard to me. I would have liked a more paint-centric UI since that seems to be their focus but overall still clean, and straightforward. Not sure what else people are looking for really.
Yes, yes it does. As with everything else in Ormr, we’re always working on it (we’re fans of frequent iterations), and so if one particular file doesn’t open correctly - just email us and we’ll fix it for you.
Yeah… that’s the next step. 
What Ormr has now is global libraries (for things like gradients, brushes, etc.) but what we also like to add are templates and something like reusable objects - where you can define a whole layer or even a group as an object, and use it in multiple documents as an instance/reference.
How to present it through a simple and understandable UI is another question… Did I get your idea right, by the way?
no linux version
Thanks for the critique. No, really - this is actually incredibly helpful.
We’ll look into these. None of the features you mentioned have been requested so far, but since you’re the first, we’ll try to accommodate these as much as we can. Especially the curves - frankly, personally I’m surprised you’re the first who mentioned them. Although I tend to use Levels most of the time, which why I don’t miss them.
Yes, right now there’s only one mask per layer (not counting per-operation masks). You can always group the layer and apply a mask to the group as a workaround for now.
Layer instances are there, actually, though admittedly they are a bit hidden - you can right-click on a layer and choose “Duplicate as Reference”. I guess this is where better docs should come on our end.
The color picker under the tool palette works the same way as in Ps - it’s for new objects only. So if you change the primary color to red, for example, the fill of all vector shapes created from that point on is red. But if you want to change the color of the existing shape, that’s where you just click on its fill parameter and change it.
That’s a work in progress, we’re fully with you here. For now, you can actually drag the tabs to re-arrange the UI within a single window - but a multi-window system is coming in the future. Having two monitors, it’s something I miss myself.
Yes on both counts. We’re not going for the full-tilt “the best brush painting package” spot; that’s a lot of very specialized work, and maybe will come later; for now, we’re aiming roughly where you mention. And, of course, we have much bigger plans, we just have to actually get all that work done. In the future, worry not, Ormr will become significantly more flexible.
Thanks again for your thoughts. Really, really helpful. Though it does remind us a bit of Slashdot’s reaction when Apple introduced the very first iPod: “No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame.” Cheers!
Hi We actually seemed to have missed your question. My apologies.
Without implementing/cloning Photoshop’s entire API, we can’t possibly run Photoshop plugins (and that’s leaving aside possible compiler issues). So unfortunately, that part we can’t do. However, we are working on our plugin system, and part of it will definitely support Python plugins (in Ormr Pro, coming later).
In fact, Ormr was designed with plugins in mind, so you’ll be able to not only create your own filters, but items can be added anywhere in the main menu, and even custom tools are possible.
Well, let us say we’re working on it… Would mind telling/emailing us what exactly doesn’t work and how? Or possibly give us some files that break? That way, we can fix it for you. If you wish, of course.
‘Adobe really is bad as an innovator. Maybe they should have focused only on PS AI and ID and AE and ditch all the rest
to have more recourses focused on core tools.’
Bigger companies, more developers = less innovation. It is a kind of law I think;) Just think about 3ds Max or Unity3D.
Mark my words, the first package to blend node-based compositing with raster painting will be the one to eat Photoshop for breakfast. Ormr doesn’t seem to be going there, though I did ask them about it. Maybe they’ll change their mind? One can only hope.
Well, I bought it anyway, it’s not the worst way I’ve wasted money. Maybe I’ll be pleasantly surprised. That and like SaintHaven said, anything that makes competition for Photoshop is good.
Btw, the huuuuuuuge UI kinda sucks, and there doesn’t seem (maybe I’m just blind) to be a way to zoom in and out without a mousewheel, or rotate the canvas, or control brush size with pen pressure, or smooth your brush strokes 
So yeah, things are missing.
Well Photo line has some serious web design and marketing problems - even their online examples are poor.
But I know for a fact that is much more advanced that PSD.
The only things I like i PS are the color correction and repair tools and thats it. I don’t care about useless filters
or a stone age layer effect paradigm. In that respect Adobe is like Google they offer some cool core tools but the
rest is very inconsistent and weak / outdated.
In may day to day work I use Pixelmator and only for few here and there tools do I fire up Photoshop again.
And I can see the same being true with Ormr having a good workflow and effect process.
Fun fact I still have Freehand installed on my PC side. Adobe Illsutrator got much better but it still lacks in so many areas.
Best fact is that AI’s snapping tool suck and often misplaces positions WTF Adobe …
The implemented a Pixel preview which does not work really in pixel space and miss displayes where pixels should be
rendering it a poor attempts to replace Fireworks.
@ AlmaTalk, the competition slept or died and that’s it. PS added more and more silly tools like the 3D stuff instead of really reworking the concept of image editing. But fact is also PS has some fantastic color correction and repair tools.
I miss the curve tools as well. Herbert is not alone.
Also:
The typography tool is very basic, offering no real typographic tools besides adding text.
Besides performance problems my biggest concern right now is the flawed move tool, writing text changes pixel position of written text and in general the content seems to swim sometimes when working.
Also selecting control points I cannot see where a vertex is in the page x/y values as well as move it with my arrow keys.
But I fully understand this is an early preview so I am very optimistic.
My dream for an improved Photoshop is to have a layer system that lets you switch to a node system for those layers and back again, using something like Blender’s compositor nodes and photoshop/photoline layers. I agree that Adobe has been caught sleeping on the job about improvements and innovation - happens with a lot of big companies. Freehand is still on a few macs here, though they are really out of date and only used for reviving old projects.