Man, after decades, why does GIMP still have a marketing problem?

Just visit www.gimp.org and compare it to www.adobe.com/ca/products/photoshop.html

Just assume both did exactly the same thing and cost the exact same amount (free or otherwise). Which would you choose based on their website?

Why does GIMP (and pretty much all FOSS) have to be so secretive about their product? Why no screenshots? Why not showcase the software on their website?

It’s so damn frustrating that every FOSS app appears to be command line software, or assumed that the user knows everything about it already.

Devs, you might have a killer piece of software, but screenshots go a long way to help with gaining interest and adoption.

Open Source software is not a product that needs marketing.
The devs making Gimp gain literally nothing from you downloading and using it.
Stop applying capitalist logic to one of the few aspects of life that haven’t been monetized yet.

Open Source software is not a product that needs marketing.

That’s highly debatable.

Surely, if nobody is using the software, then there’s no incentive to keep making it.

Marketing generates interest. Interest gets users. Users (hopefully) get donations and/or contributions to the project.

Even from a purely practical standpoint, why not be clear and avoid wasting people’s time as they try to figure out what exactly a project is about?

I’m not suggesting that GIMP take out Facebook ads. But my god, would a few screenshots kill the project?