Paint.NET is Coming to the Windows Store

Posted on July 10, 2017 by Paul Thurrott in Windows 10 with 37 Comments

Paint.NET is Coming to the Windows Store

Paint.NET, a free and well-regarded graphics editor for Windows, is coming to the Windows Store, Rick Brewster said this week.

Well, actually, Brewster, who is the creator of Paint.NET, originally noted his intention to bring the app to the Store back in June. He did via a quick support forums post.

I’m going to release a 4.0.17 update and then focus just on pushing to Windows Store.

With a few enthusiasts blogs picking up on his plans, Brewster has now come clean. And he’s provided a few more details about his plans.

“My plan is [to] release 4.0.17 which has some important fixes for performance and high-DPI, and then focus exclusively on bringing 4.0.17 to the Windows Store,” he writes. “I’d love to give a date but I’ve always gotten them wrong … my code signing certificate is expiring soon and obviously I need to renew it. Hopefully, that won’t be too onerous.”

Brewster also notes that Paint.NET will remain free in Windows Store form.

For those who are unfamiliar, Paint.NET is a popular graphics editing program, similar to GIMP. It began has a Microsoft Paint replacement but has gotten quite a bit more complex and full-featured. It’s notable for a number of reasons, but for me, the big one is that it was written in C# using the .NET Framework. So I’m curious whether Brewster will add UWP features to the app once it’s in the Store.


Tagged with

Join the discussion!


Don't have a login but want to join the conversation? Become a Thurrott Premium or Basic User to participate

Comments (37)

37 responses to “Paint.NET is Coming to the Windows Store”

  1. goodbar

    Nice! I use it all the time.

  2. wolters

    It looks like we are finally seeing some traction with the Windows Store. It's taken 5 years and we still have a ways to go...but it is progress.

  3. scotttech1

    I love Paint.NET I've been using it and its many plugins for years for my photography business, glad to see it getting the Store Treatment so its available in 10 S

  4. Narg

    I know there might be better paint programs, depending on the work you do. But, I still keep going back to every time I just need to get it done. No deep learning needed, like most others. It just works. Glad to hear it heading forward to the Store.

    • Belralph

      In reply to Narg:

      I second the vote. I've tried numerous image editors but have setting on for at least the last 3+ years. 99% of the time I just need to crop, resize, or mark up a screen shot or a camera uploaded picture. lets me get the job done quickly with a simple interface that has a very minimal learning curve. If it is weeks between using it I don't have to go watch a youtube video to relearn how to use a basic function like with more powerful and complicated programs.

  5. Roger Ramjet

    I guess my follow up question is to ask Brewster, why? It might be eduational what is causing prime developers to slowly start putting stuff up in the Windows Store.

    • rickcosby

      In reply to Roger Ramjet:

      Updating is an issue, but in my mid, the real reason is to make sure that non-tech users can find and install your software without the crapware that can be bundled by many of the sites that host software. Go Google for and look at the places where you can download it, and pretend you are a "normal" person. The correct choice is there, of course, but there are also several similar links that will cheerfully install unwanted junk either alongside or instead of the program you actually want.

  6. Waethorn

    I don't mind this program, but time and time again I find myself going back to Paint Shop Pro for the features that this one lacks.

  7. skane2600

    "So I’m curious whether Brewster will add UWP features to the app once it’s in the Store."

    So does that mean this will be a "Centennialized" version of the traditional program rather than a UWP app? If so the result will be that we can now run this new version of Paint.NET on 1/2 the PCs that used to run it. (assuming W10 has 50% or less of the current Windows market). Of course if Brewster continues to advance the traditional version, this version will merely be redundant rather than losing 1/2 its platforms.

  8. rameshthanikodi

    This is by far my favourite "go-to-quick-edit" app on Windows, especially since now it looks like the best cropping tool from MS is going to be the crappy one in the Photos app. Paint.NET is one of the first things I install on a fresh machine. The built-in updater has always annoyed me so I can't wait to switch to the Store version.

  9. TeeJaySD

    Honestly he should add a "donation" in-app purchase for those people that want to contribute. It doesn't have to add any functionality except get him a little compensation for his efforts.

    • SiBrowne

      In reply to TeeJaySD:

      That would be a great idea. You can donate through the website

      but it would be a lot easier through the store.

      I've used for years and I own this guy a good few beers!

    • wright_is

      In reply to TeeJaySD:

      I'd buy that for a dollar.

      Great idea. I often look at donation ware and I'm often not sure whether I can trust the site or the payment method - or they only accept PayPal or something, which I don't use. Having the payment going through the Store would make it much easier.

      Maybe a range of payments, from 99c up to $50 or something?

  10. bbold

    Great news! Now we just need Chrome. *crickets*

    • bsd107

      In reply to bbold:

      Every time somebody suggests getting Chrome in the Windows Store, I am reminded of the debacle of getting YouTube on Windows Phone 8.x.

      Chrome on Windows Store will never happen as Google would never do anything that helps promote, support or enable the viability of a new and competing MS platform.

    • lvthunder

      In reply to bbold:

      Talk to Google about that one.

      • Vuppe

        In reply to lvthunder:

        More like talk to Microsoft, since the Windows Store has a similar use-my-engine to iOS' where even Firefox is on webkit. Unlikely Google will go near edgeHTML.

        • PhilipVasta

          In reply to Vuppe:

          I'm really curious about this. It seems like they could have avoided so many headaches had they used Webkit in Edge. I'm not a developer, so I don't really know though. That at least would be less of a hurdle for getting Chrome in the Store.

          • Vuppe

            In reply to PhilipVasta:

            Webkit is Apple's pet project, so that wasn't likely. Google is even trying to distance themselves from Webkit with Blink, which is just a branch of Webkit, but a branch nonetheless.

            Opera got itself in hot water with fans when it switched from Presto to Blink. Maybe Microsoft was under the impression that Trident had fans?

            Anyway, as long as edgeHTML remains a solid engine, as a web developer, I'm ok with it. Just let Trident die. Safari and Webkit are the ones falling behind right now, it's frustrating developing for them same as developing for IE.

          • IanYates82

            In reply to PhilipVasta:

            I'm glad they didn't from a monoculture point of view. They'd want to have forked, like Google themselves did (to blink), anyway.

            MS needs to have its browser for JavaScript UWP apps too.

  11. bbold

    PS.. Paul (and others) did you know that Adobe Photoshop Essentials 15 will *NOT* work on a new Surface Laptop running 10s? That's because Essentials is a Win 64 app, and 10s runs Win 32 apps. A little confusing, and Store will let you buy it and install it on 10s, it just won't open. ;/ I talked to MS store support and they refunded me the $$ I spent on the app. Just wanted to give you all a heads up, you'll have to upgrade to Win 10 Pro to get Essentials from the Store to work if you are running 10s. may be a good substitute for Essentials on the Surface Laptop running 10s. Or is this a Win 64 app, too?

    • lvthunder

      In reply to bbold:

      That doesn't make much sense to me since all but the lowest one has over 4GB of RAM which means it needs a 64bit OS.

      • IanYates82

        In reply to lvthunder:

        Most gui apps don't need the 64bit address space. Sure have a 64bit OS but each app doesn't need more than 3gb of RAM available to 32bit apps that are large address aware.

        Still doesn't quite explain why a centennial app can't be 64bit but it's not necessarily a problem. Most 64bit only software is for servers, like Exchange and recent versions of SQL server. Heck, even MS recommends sticking with 32bit office unless you're doing massive excel spreadsheets.

        64bit for browsers is a thing, but that's mainly as a security measure because ASLR is much more effective when it's got a massive address space in which to randomise the loaded DLL locations in memory.

        • wright_is

          In reply to IanYates82:

          MS Office 64-bit, most graphics and multimedia, audio and video packages are 64-bit, because you are dealing with very large images or objects and need plenty of RAM, especially if you are playing with effects and layers.

          On my PC: VLC 64-bit, Notepad++ 64-bit, Chrome 64-bit, Firefox 64-bit... Yes, there are 32-bit versions of these available, but they aren't server programs.

          • Narg

            In reply to wright_is:

            iOS 11 is going 100% 64 bit only too, by the way... Seems 32 Bit is dying. Probably a good thing. Someone needs to let MS know though.

            • bbold

              In reply to Narg:

              Exactly. Microsoft needs to update everything to 64 bit and allow their new Surface Laptop to run all apps in the Store. Why limit Windows 10 S to Store apps when you can't even run some of them on 10 S? 10 S should be able to run anything from the store, imho.

  12. kalin27

    It's great that it works, I was waiting impatiently. Great job! I like this!