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.''"
Too powerful for normal users, too limited for power users.
Image editing is still way behind Windows and Mac OSX, where you have Photoshop for power users and also Paint Shop Pro for less power users, but who still like a full image editing suite.
A lot of us have been saying that UI is godawful for a LONG time, only to be shouted down by the fanboys. Now it looks like the developers at Canonical agree. And considering that one of their big goals was to make a user-friendly Linux distro, with a halfway decent GUI, I can understand why they would appreciate something that's obvious to anyone who isn't wearing blinders.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
why do the developers of gimp refuse to change the name? i have used gimp, i have it installed on windows, and i really like it. i think that given it is free software, it goes far and beyond what one would expect of a free program.
but surely it could benefit from a name change...what would be the downside of a name change? would some developer's egos be bruised that they bowed to outside pressure?
i dont mean to troll, but once the name changes
Nonsense. it's like removing Photoshop from the install of Windows.
Oh, wait......
I agree it should be in the package manager as a download.
I think the CD version should just be a bare bones OS with all your drivers and a few basic aps, the DVD version should be the deluxe model with all the bells and whistles.
That way for people who just want to add stuff later so they can pick and choose load a CD for people who want it all weather they use it not they can go DVD.
I think some other distro's work this way.
One of the first things I hear about, next to "Can I sync my iPod" is "Can I run photoshops to edit my pics?" To the average person who has figured out how to crop in Photoshop and paste to things together with layers, GIMP is a dream. Complex, sure, but so is Photoshop. I understand the decision and actually kind of agree with it, but I think saying because it's too confusing for users is a little undermining their target audience of savvy 20 somethings who pirate Photoshop to make LOLcats.
if you're used to Photoshop. Gimp is a lot more intuitive than Photoshop if you're used to Gimp. I've cursed at Photoshop; my wife curses at Gimp. That's cause we got used to working with one, and the other just works differently.
Visit http://ringbreak.dnd.utwente.nl/~mrjb/growingbettersoftware to download your free copy of the book
RTFA, you are way off base:
* the general user doesn't use it
* its user-interface is too complex
* it's an application for professionals
* desktop users just want to edit photos and they can do that in F-Spot
* it's a photoshop replacement and photoshop isn't included by default in Windows...
* it takes up room on the disc
None of those are anything the GIMP folks should take as a negative. You don't see Photoshop installed on every home PC for digital photo touch up, do you? They are saying that there are plenty of other smaller, easier to use applications for that purpose. GIMP will still be available via apt/Synaptic for those of us who might want to use it, it's just not going to be part of the DEFAULT installation.
Ok, so they removed GIMP. Maybe not so bad... assuming their out-of-the-install "replacement" was decent. But come on, F-Spot? What the f***? Seriously? I don't like so-called "media libraries" that ask you for a specific "working directory" and mention copying all your crap over to it *right on the first screen*. I guess the best thing about this is that it's only a _sudo apt-get install gimp_ away. Couldn't their replacement at least be a proper image EDITOR, not all-in-one manager? No way in hell I'm touching F-Spot, that's for sure.
Sounds sensible to me. I'd imagine the vast majority of Ubuntu users are unlikely to use the gimp.
And any user that wants Gimp will know to install it. It was a rather specialized package to install on every desktop distro. We don't put geda or rosegarden or Scilab on every desktop. If I'm setting up a machine for web browsing, games, light office tasks, etc., Gimp just wastes space and install time.
I am not a crackpot.
It's too bad, really. I like GIMP because it shows users that unlike Windows, which comes with a bunch of widget apps at best, that Ubuntu comes with serious productivity software, equivalents of which on Windows can cost hundreds or thousands of dollars.
I guess I can see where they're coming from. I do agree that double-clicking on a picture shouldn't launch a full-fledged photo editor like GIMP, but I liked that it was easily accessible without having to do anything extra. Couldn't the same argument be made of OpenOffice.org? Are they going to replace it anytime soon with a scaled-down Wordpad equivalent? What about Compiz? Those also take up space, aren't needed for basic computer use, and could be installed with trivial effort.
Actually, for most users, I'd suggest GIMP on Windows, or for lighter-duty work, Paint.NET. I gave up on Paint Shop Pro after Jasc sold out to Corel. It's gotten more expensive and now they're playing games I hate that other mainstream commercial software is. (There's now a more expensive "Paint Shop Pro Ultimate" edition...). Too bad, too. Years ago, Paint Shop Pro was one of the first shareware programs I ever bought.
This isn't true. In Photoshop, I use the selector tool and select an area and crop it. In Gimp I have to add a layer, then select an area a crop. WTF is the point of adding a layer so I can crop it?
It is worse, because it's an acronym. Not only that, the acronym already exists as an unrelated word in the dictionary, so it's twice as bad. And it has some rather unflattering meanings, so that's three times worse!
Here's a far better name, took me 2 minutes to think of:
GNU Image Manipulation, or GIM, pronounced "Jim" as in "Jimmy up some lolcats in there" or "fake, that pic's been jimmed!".
Easier to pronounce, has no meaning as either GIM or "Jim" in any language I can think of, except as a name in English.
True confidence comes not from realising you are as good as your peers, but that your peers are as bad as you are.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
One of the ways of introducing people to alternative software is to install it and have in sitting there on the menu. By removing the GIMP, they're just encouraging people to think that linux is "not ready for serious users."
For people who are used to working with photoshop, the GIMP is different - hence cumbersome. Same as for people used to MS-Office, OpenOffice is "too different", or who are used to "teh InnerNet == IE", firefox was too cumbersome.
People got over it with firefox, they're getting over it with oo, and given time, those who are sufficiently motivated to explore will get over it with the gimp.
Between the fugly colour schemes, the stupid naming schemes, the artificial restrictions on root (hey - it's MY computer, not yours), not including the toolchain for building the system by default - even on xubuntu, etc., I'm glad I stuck with opensuse.
If they want it to be so dumbed down, why don't they just pull a lindows/linspire?
Yes, it's a flame, but ubuntu sucks for development. And now it's going to suck for users who want a bit more than average / mediocre.
I've found myself in a position more than once trying to explain that GIMP is a powerful image editor. But management types don't listen after I tell them the name of the software. "GIMP"'s name is the single biggest barrier to adoption of what is otherwise a fantastic image editing software. I've been using it for years to produce my (admittedly not at the Disney level) graphics - see farmdirectory.org for my latest project that includes (among a ton of other OSS) GIMP's handy work.
The latest version of Gimp had some really nice enhancements to the UI. I use GIMP almost every day. Every time I spin up the GIMP process, though, I lament the name.
What version of GIMP are you using, something from like 1998?
1) Make selection
2) Open "Image" menu in main menubar
3) Click "Crop to Selection"
You're done. That seems pretty easy and straight forward to me, and sounds almost identical to what you described. It's the way I've been cropping images for as long as I can remember in GIMP. I'm sure there's *always* a harder way you can find to do something, but that doesn't mean it's the way you are intended to.
As long as I can still do "sudo apt-get install gimp", who cares?
I disagree; as someone with almost no experience using either GIMP or Photoshop, I find things a lot easier to do in Photoshop on the rare occasions I need to do some image manipulation (on a computer with PS installed). My own computer has Ubuntu (and thus GIMP) on it and every time I need to do something it's a battle between me and the program to get it to do what I want.
Oh, cry me a river.
Intelligent people who want to "solve the problem themselves" will do so by clicking on the install package for GIMP and be right where they'd have been if this hadn't been done. You're the one complaining like a spoiled child, which means presumably you're affiliated with the GIMP project. Meanwhile, the majority of Ubuntu users who don't care either way will go on about their business, noting that there are several MB of tools they actually find useful in the default install where GIMP had previously displaced them.
Power and efficiency do not require a craptastic user interface. That argument only comes from those who can't do UI design and don't want to admit it's a limitation in their skillset.
Your movie quotes apply to how we present ourselves, not how we present the things we make. The makers of Ubuntu are making it for users; they want it to be used, so they care what the users think - even the ones you think are idiots for not agreeing with your views on what is good software.
Meanwhile, you sound awfully bitter that GIMP isn't loved enough to keep its precious spot on the Ubuntu default install CD.
But you know what, have it your way. If you want to believe that Ubuntu is the project that will suffer as a result of caring about user experience, rather than seeing that GIMP is at this moment suffering for failing to do so, go ahead. Too bad I won't get to hear your excuses when we see this in hindsight a few years from now.
Yeah I too got a bit "pissy" when I discovered that XEmacs was not included in the Red Hat releases by default anymore... 10 years ago or something close to that.... but with yum/apt et.al. its easy to get... I have over 1 GB of packages that aren't in the default Fedora install... big deal... booohooo... its so simple that I've completely forgot about what a default install is and I don't care.
A big non-story but that is my side of the view. YMMV.
I have no issue with this. Gimp is more than most people need anyhow and maybe it will be a good kick in the nads to get the Gimp guys to clean it up a little more.
Photoshop is a lot more intuitive than Gimp is. I always feel like I have to jump through hoops to do the same thing in Gimp as I do in Photoshop.
Photoshop is not intuitive. Where do you get that idea from? The Photoshop UI is a mess. That is why people make a living teaching other people how to use Photoshop.
In fact the GIMP UI is a lot like various user interfaces that Adobe uses on OS X.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Sometimes I notice a wonderful double standard on slashdot. The GIMP having an interface that is entirely, completely unlike Photoshop is not a weakness. Microsoft rearranging a few things into a ribbon is a complete disaster that will kill it. That. Does. Not. Compute.
Yes, I know there's more than one person on slashdot but you'd think the moderation and groupthink was the same but even the groupthink is inconsistent. Personally, I think the GIMP interface is a victim of designers with too much knowledge. If you know the code, know the modules then things seem so much more logical than if you're staring at a black box. I just see a bunch of puzzle pieces and no obvious way they're hanging together.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
You are captain obvious and captain oblivious in the same post. Duh, it is an acronym. But the acronym has a negative connotation to it. I don't care if Recursive Execution To Automatically Rate Derivatives is the best, most descriptive name you have come up with. If it has a negative connotation, maybe you should come up with something better.
Support a great indie game: http://www.abaddon360.com
I'm sorry, no. Try doing something as simple as drawing a black box or triangle in GIMP. Why the hell do you have to use paths to draw simple geometric shapes?
If there was a "Canonical's Ultimate Network Test suite", "Sun Human Interface Toolkit" or "Hulu's Interactive Television & Live Entertainment Room" all of those would be descriptive names. However, naming those products after their acronymns would be just as stupid as calling it GIMP.
I'm not familiar with the negative association you mention, but I do have a negative association with the word "Gimp": it's slang for a crippled person. Just what I need: software that hobbles along!
One thing that Linux seriously needs to get over is the need to name everything with acronyms. Mozilla didn't call their browser the Standard Link-browsing Universal Gui, because SLUG is a horrible name for a browser. And GIMP is a horrible name for... well, anything.
Then the icon is this crazed badger or something. I'm confused from the get-go.
The complete lack of marketing savvy is one thing that gives Linux the "not ready for prime time" public image. At least Ubuntu makes software that doesn't scare people.
The claims of removing Gimp are just smoke and noise to hid the damage the monomaniacs are doing elsewhere in Debian and Ubuntu.
Microsofters always try to present their schemes as a done deal. It's documented in their bag of tricks. The relevant trick is from plaintiff's exhibit 3096 from the court case Comes v Microsoft. Microsoft appeared prepared to ignore the last state, Iowa, indefinitely in the last unresolved class action case for over-charging. Roll down to page 45 and start reading. Or download the song version.
Regardles, Ubuntu 10.4, Lucid Lynx is just starting. There are several channels through which the mistake can be corrected. One is through brainstorm: Idea #110: No Mono by default in Ubuntu can use your vote.
Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
Mucking about with the packaging is the clearest sign you're using the wrong distribution. No one can tell you what the best distro is for your needs, but take a friendly word of advice from someone who used to run gentoo testing, one of the most bleeding edge repositories out there, still considered it to lag too far, so started compiling some apps from cvs, still found that lagging too far, and started manually patching security fixes from mailing lists before they were even committed to cvs. If that sounds like addictive behavior to you, I wouldn't disagree. Upgraders Anonymous, anyone?
Guess what I run now? My two computers run karmic koala, and my wife's computer runs hardy heron LTS. At some point I asked myself what benefit I was gaining from my obsession with being up to date. I couldn't give a better answer than what you said above: a couple point versions. What's a point version, really? What new features did I rely on, or even just really like from those point versions? I couldn't tell you. What additional risk did I assume by waiting for the normal security update process to propagate through? A negligible few weeks during which my easier to update IDS rules and other layers of security told me I never had anything to worry about. What benefits have I received since I stopped worrying about having the latest and greatest? A system that breaks far less often, and requires much less of my own effort to maintain, while still having a feature set that only lags a few months behind. I still keep up with the news of up and coming new features, but don't worry if it won't work on my desktop until lucid, or whenever. You may have better answers for your situation than I did, but I hope you'll at least ask them of yourself.
This space intentionally left blank.
So I've used various drawing programs for years to make crappy little graphical schematics to post online. MS Paint is all I really need, although I've used Photoshop and similar programs as well.
I heard a lot about how powerful GIMP was, and my Mac didn't come with even a basic drawing tool, so I downloaded it. Lasted... oh, maybe 2 minutes.
The issue came when I wanted to draw a line. Now, every other graphics program I've used has a "line" tool, somewhere in plain sight. Observe: ...and so on. Such was not the case for GIMP. In GIMP, you use the Shift key with other tools to draw lines. Not an inherently bad way of doing things, I guess. But here's how you have to find out about it:
http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows-vista/Using-Paint
http://www.extropia.com/tutorials/photoshop/line_tool.html
http://www.gimp.org/tutorials/Straight_Line/ (That's from the official GIMP site, mind you.)
Hey, GIMP guys. Screw you and your sarcastic screenshot telling me what the "Shift" button is. Your interface is the WEIRD one. People who use MS Paint or Photoshop or friggin' ClarisWorks - your potential customers - expect "line" to be a tool, not a key. And it's not like the key is entitled "Shift Or Draw Straight Lines In Some Linux Programs." It is NON-OBVIOUS that this would be the manner you draw lines. I don't care that I had to look up how to use a new interface, but don't act like I'm supposed to psychically fucking know ahead of time how your arbitrary interface works.
Note how both MS Paint and Photoshop are way MORE straightforward in this operation, and yet avoid sarcasm in their tutorials.
Try using Debian Testing, if you're a little shy of trying the unstable collection. It's still very up to date, lagging the unstable release by a few weeks or months, and packages have already filtered through unstable, so most obvious issues have been ironed out.
I use Testing as my default release, although I've also selectively installed applications from unstable and experimental. I'm really happy with how it all works. It suits me perfectly.
Then again, I'm the kind of guy who likes to use Gimp to tweak level curves on photos. Gimp too hard to use? I don't think so.
Using a clone of a library which was originally written by Microsoft does not make software "Microsoft-designed".
"16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard