People are using Adobe for completely different reasons. They are so established in creative industry that everything rotates around their software including it's bugs and quirks. Schools teach only Adobe. When you go to high end printers they have processes prepared for output from Adobe software. There is whole market of specialized software plugins for Adobe. For the industry professionals it's just shared ground and cost of doing business.

The AI clones won't easily change that unless they were exact 1to1. If it was that easy to get rid of Adobe the monopoly won't be there anymore as things like Affinity have existed for a while and are free. Affinity is in many ways even better version of Adobe suite, faster, more stable, allowing to be more creative. But the friction is extreme, because if you need to collaborate or be in any way part of the industry then Adobe is expected so you need it anyway.

Question, how viable are these tools and are they maintained?

I genuinely want to know if this is mostly hype or are they actually good. I don't think trying myself would really give a better picture as I'm not a user of said software.

Anyone who tried to replace photoshop with these AI clones successfully?

I can't believe decompiling from ASM to a higher level lang using a matrix multiplicator should be legally any different from other decompilers.

Nor should using the work of hundreds of millions of people to find useful weights for the matrices without paying them be legal.

https://github.com/storytold/photocraft/issues?q=is%3Aissue+... It's also a buggy mess