I find it great and in fact I prefer some things to photoshop, like the default keyboard shortcuts, saves as a project file, better filters, amazing plugins, full control over preferences and scriptability. I also prefer the foreground select tool and unified transform tool. There are a few things that PS does better though, like its warp tool and custom print settings, plus obviously nondestructive editing (coming in next GIMP release). People shit on GIMP way more than it deserves. I put it down to a) sunk costs in learning Photoshop b) slow development in the past and c) groupthink/fashionable.

As a 10+ year GIMP user, yes it's that bad.

I still use it because it's the only relatively full featured photo editor that works on all my platforms, but... Yea.

Well, i feel like gimp only have like the 40% of the funcitons and some of the dont work so well. Just starting with no CMYK mode, so I can't work with printables.

For professionals used to Photoshop, yes it is that bad. People want what's familiar because they're used to it and they're busy or lazy. They don't want to learn something new.

If GIMP wanted to increase their userbase by a million overnight, they would make it look more like Photoshop.

The problem is they and many current users are huge FOSS zealots and see this kind of thing akin to selling your soul to the devil.