Doesn't matter. People have work to do with tools, not list out all the features. If Krita works for the person, there's no reason to use Gimp or Photoshop.
Whether it works for you isn't the criteria by which you should judge whether something is better or not. A hammer is also better than the GIMP at hammering a nail, but because I only need to hammer nails doesn't make the GIMP worse at what it does than a hammer.
Krita is better for people who need to do a lot less than what the GIMP is capable of doing.
If Krita works for the person it implies neither Gimp or Photoshop were exactly the right tool to begin with, since Krita is oriented towards a different set of tasks than Gimp/Photoshop
