Slashdot Mirror
GIMP Dropped From Ubuntu 10.04
kai_hiwatari writes "It looks like the Ubuntu developers consider GIMP to be too powerful for a normal desktop user. They are removing it from the upcoming Ubuntu 10.04. Among the reasons cited are that the UI is too complex, it takes up room on the disc, and 'desktop users just want to edit photos and they can do that in F-Spot.''"
Let's be clear - it's not removed from Ubuntu, it's removed from the default install.
It's still a click away in the package manager.
Sounds sensible to me. I'd imagine the vast majority of Ubuntu users are unlikely to use the gimp.
This should more properly say "GIMP dropped from Default Ubuntu 10.04"
If GIMP were actually being dropped(i.e. the devs said "fuck it, it isn't worth packaging for our repos, users who care can get it from a third party repo or build it from source.") that would be news, and bad news for GIMP. As it is, though, Ubuntu makes it trivial to find and install programs that are in the default repositories.
And perhaps you don't know that the upcoming GIMP 2.8 will feature a "single window mode". I tested it by compiling from the git repository: it still has a LOT of rough edges (that's unreleased software for you) but it's better than the present UI in my opinion. Even if it's just removed from the live CD, I find this move from Canonical to be borderline on stupid.
A CC-licensed illustrated horror novel
On Windows there's also my personal favorite, Paint.NET. It does WAY more than Paint, it's fast, and it's free. It ain't Photoshop, but it's all I need.
Gimp was originally built on Solaris using Motif. I used to work with Spencer and it had nothing to do with demonstrating the power and flexibility of free desktop systems.
Not forgetting on OS X Pixelmator which is a truly *excellent* piece of software
No, it's not moved to universe. It's still in main. It's only being removed from the install CD and the default install. Yes, it sucks that you now have to download it if you're really using it, but you also have to realize that the install CD is *extremely* packed already and it's getting very hard to find a few remaining bytes to add things that Ubuntu considers more important to the default install and experience.
In how many editors is the red-eye-removal tool something that actually manipulates the red layer of the image rather than just being a black paint tool?
It seems stupid that Gimp is one of the few editors that will not mar your photos if you try to do red-eye removal on something like the cheek but it is true. The dang thing is a tad more complex than a "simple editor" needs to be but it at least gets the "technical details" of the process correct. The "simple tools" don't.
I've been suggesting a "granny gimp" sort of UI theme for a long time.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
It's not that Gimp is too powerful for the normal desktop user, it's the fact that Gimp's user interface is way, way too confusing for anyone but those who REALLY want to learn it. I've been using Adobe and Corel paint/photoediting programs for 15 years now and, let me tell you, that knowledge does not necessarily translate to Gimp. It's like starting from scratch, and not in the "about time someone rebuilt this from the ground up" kind of way, more of the "what the hell were they thinking?" kinda way. Then again, it's open source. It's powerful software created by people who'd rather be using a command line anyway...
Wise men say, "Forgiveness is divine, but never pay full price for late pizza."
Try Debian Unstable.
It's almost always newer than Ubuntu. Stuff is updated very regularly and you don't have to mess around with PPAs.
I disagree. Serious users will know exactly what they need and download it. 'Regular' desktop users will do fine with FSpot.
It's not as if they are banning GSpot from the desktop. People can always download it if they prefer.
Its worth noting that gimp will still be part of the default install for Ubuntu Studio. Should you require Gimp on a default install of some kind.
crap?!?
I confess - I've tried several photo suites. I would love for Gimp to be as good as or better than photoshop, and it's not.
It *is* 90% of photoshop, at 0% of the price, which is far more than any of the other (half-dozen) suites *I* have seen in various jobs. It has one major failing that they're working on in the palette issue (I happily concede having never been in a situation where that made the slightest difference. That said, sure I don't do desktop publishing, but I'm am not egocentric enough to go "Sure it's a major field but I don't use it so who cares!". Yeah, it's a major failing that doesn't happen to affect most users.)
But it's a great software application, it's simple/intuitive enough that my *mother* can use it (Admittedly, she wasn't ruined by using photoshop first), it does 90% of what it's strongest competitor does, 99% of what any standard user will do, it's a small (~35 mb vs 1 Gig(?!?!) required for CS!) install, it runs well (Let's not get into the *other* CS requirements), and it's, ah . . . not the price of a used car.
You keep using this word - I do not think it means what you think it means.
Pug
An Invisible Entity of Vast Power whose existence must be taken on faith alone: Liberal Media