And as far as free software, I think they generally think "people ought to care more about freedom for everyone, than closing stuff up"
The GIMP developers say “we want our layers to work like this, take it or leave it”, and they have every right to do so. They write the code, they pay their own bills, they get to call the shots.
The GNU people say “software should be free-as-in-speech”. That is certainly their right, and to some extent I agree with them. However, that ideological stance means that the GNU project does not have any resources it can assign to the GIMP project (or anyone, for that matter).
GNU hackers do what they want, when they want it, sometimes they get sponsored or backed by a company, but that is a rare thing ... question should be why aren't software development companies sponsoring developers to work on GIMP, GNU, and other free software projects?
Mostly ideological I would guess. The sorts of people the were/are running the FSF didn't want to involve themselves with the sort of 'dirty' compromises needed to raise significant funds and end up beholden to large, almost certainly corporate, donors.
This is one of the main reasons why Free Software lost the 'war' to Open Source back in the day.