>>10628
Looked it up; judging by the videos showcasing its features (most are dated ca.1year ago so something may have changed) it does have *some* of the features AE does but also lacks others and does not offer anything that AE can't handle (especially if we account for countless user-made extensions). In fact, like half of the features displayed could be accomplished in Premiere Pro. Maybe the authors of those videos just weren't showing off the really advanced stuff, but by all accounts Friction only focuses on 2d effects (mostly vector), whereas AE does advanced particles, 3d with all sorts of camera tricks etc. It's just more feature rich.
On top of that, it has legacy in the form large numbers plugins and templates (both usually paid-only, of course, if available outside of the company they were created by/for) in spades.
A competitor would have to offer something either truly groundbreaking or be compatible with those things. Kind of like Krita (partially) supports .psd files.
That's the whole impetus behind the reverse engineered Adobe hype, it seems to offer some backwards compatibility out of the box which could help with moving over from those proprietary apps. If we really want to stop Adobe without that the solution is for universities and colleges to drop Adobe and focus on FOSS alternatives instead. But no employer will require knowledge of GIMP over Photoshop so why would they?
Figma now do