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.''"

30 of 900 comments (clear)

  1. Where does this leave GIMP? by sopssa · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Where does this leave GIMP? by MBGMorden · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't think many people will care. Ubuntu already doesn't provide a lot of software I use pretty often (avidemux for example) - I'll just grab GIMP using apt.

      I like it though. Don't get me wrong as someone who once taught Photoshop (only a beginner's class - I'm by no means a Photshop guru) I realize that it's limited in comparison, but the thing is that I don't do professional graphics work. I edit home pictures and just generally goof around. I need more than MS Paint, but I don't want to spend any money given my limited software budget I allow myself for personal purchases (mostly just games nowadays - for utility programs I use only free stuff). As such, since I won't resort to pirating commercial apps, GIMP does nicely. It's about as close to Photoshop as you're going to get in a free application, and once you get used to it it's not that bad.

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    2. Re:Where does this leave GIMP? by S-4'N3 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Agreed about the joke, but does GNOME and Ubuntu rely on GIMP? I doubt it. Anybody who needs it can still install it, and it will still top most searches as being the only viable free alternative to photoshop.

    3. Re:Where does this leave GIMP? by poetmatt · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Inversely, are we supposed to believe you because of your registered account or UID? a quick google search of "gimp solaris motif" says no . Try not harping on people just because they're anonymous, douchebag. Disclaimer: I am not the anon.

      From the link:

      Currently, the biggest restriction to running the GIMP is the Motif
      requirement. We will release a statically linked binary for several
      systems soon (including Linux).

    4. Re:Where does this leave GIMP? by josh_freeman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I've always wondered why one of the camera manufacturers hasn't gotten behind Gimp instead of writing their own buggy photo editing/raw conversion tools. It would prove interesting.

    5. Re:Where does this leave GIMP? by Fallingcow · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Part of the trouble is the attitude of GIMP interface lovers (and the devs?) re. what is the job of the app and what's the job of the WM--specifically, it seems they think that it's the user's job to make sure they're running it in a windowing environment that can pick up The GIMP's slack, since that stuff is "the WM's job, not the app".

      This is a problem because no other programs that I'm aware of subscribe to that philosophy, and (perhaps consequently) I don't even know what environment I'd have to run the damn thing in to get the features it ought to provide on its own. I mean, you're just totally fucked in Windows, and even in Linux the best I've managed was a combination of sticky windows and focus-follows-mouse with a dedicated virtual desktop for The Gimp--but I hate focus-follows-mouse and I hate The Gimp for (apparently) expecting me to use it to make their interface remotely usable.

      I can't remember ever using another program that expected me to bend my environment to the needs of the program, rather than the app finding a way to fit in and handle its own damned unique needs, especially since my preferred WM setup is about as vanilla as you can get.

  2. name change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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

    1. Re:name change by harmonise · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What would be the upside of changing the name?

      The upside would be having a software program whose name is not a pejorative term in the English language.

      --
      Cory Doctorow talking about cloud computing makes as much sense as George W Bush talking about electrical engineering.
  3. Nonsense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Nonsense. it's like removing Photoshop from the install of Windows.

    Oh, wait......

  4. Re:Only removed from default install by JDeane · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

  5. Re:Yep by Darundal · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why is this stupid? Most users photo editing is limited to stuff like removing red-eye. A lot of users don't even do that. Not to say that GIMP isn't good, but one does have to wonder exactly why it should be in the default install or live CD. Can you explain why you think it is borderline stupid for them to pull something out most users aren't using, especially considering they are likely to use the space for a bunch of other software that more people are likely to use (why else would they give a limited room excuse)?

  6. Re:I have no issue with this by mrjb · · Score: 4, Insightful
    When are people going to learn?

    Photoshop is a lot more intuitive than Gimp is

    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
  7. Re:Yep by Panzor · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I don't mind the gimp UI as long as it has it's own workspace. Gimp on windows or gimp on a desktop used by someone that doesn't utilize multiple workspaces is...agonizing.

  8. Yay. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  9. Re:Only removed from default install by Rob+the+Bold · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.
  10. Too bad, really by KingSkippus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

    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.

    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.

  11. Re:Yep by scorp1us · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This is par for open source. We've (I) have been clamoring for this for at least 5 years now since 2004/5, and we're getting it delivered in 2010. I am happy it is coming, I am sad it took so damn long. Because I know I was not a marginal case. I refuse to use GIMP because it just isn't laid out like PS. I tried I gave up. I tried I gave up. I tried I gave up. I've seriously tried every year, but I am too ingrained with PS to "get it"

    But I am glad the fan boys came around and realized *they* are the marginal users, and continuing their stance is in turn marginalizing their software. We do need a PS replacement that isn't so damn annoying. Imagine if the KOffice, OpenOffice and GNOME Office document writer apps were a white window where your typing went and each tool bar a separate window. People would hate it. PS/GIMP is no different.

    --
    Slashdot's rate-of-post filter: Preventing you from posting too many great ideas at once.
  12. Re:The name says what it does by fbjon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.
  13. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  14. Another stupid move by ubuntu by tomhudson · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Another stupid move by ubuntu by tomhudson · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Where do you draw the line though? You can't possibly put icons for everything on the desktop - you'd need a 50" screen.

      [X] Who said anything about icons. Stick it in the applications menu. Would Applications->>Graphics->GIMP be so hard?
      [X] My desktop is 3840x1200, you ignorant clod!
      [X] My 50" plasma IS my laptop secondary display.

      Ubuntu is taking a step backwards here. Again.

    2. Re:Another stupid move by ubuntu by Nadaka · · Score: 3, Insightful

      GIMP isn't ready for serious users because its called GIMP. The word has a fairly long history and association with homoerotic bondage and would be seen as sexually deviant by most people. Someone not familiar with GIMP will have no idea what it actually does and have the above pretext as the only clue. These people with either be terribly offended and avoid it, or be sorely disappointed when they don't find the kink they thought they would.

  15. John by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  16. What is the story? by Nukenbar · · Score: 4, Insightful

    As long as I can still do "sudo apt-get install gimp", who cares?

  17. Re:Oh the power of the retards... by mea37 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.

  18. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  19. Re:The name says what it does by brkello · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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
  20. Re:The name says what it does by mjeffers · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.

  21. GIMP's stupid name by Nerdposeur · · Score: 5, Insightful

    GIMP isn't ready for serious users because its called 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.

  22. Why I Quit GIMP After 2 Minutes by ZombieRoboNinja · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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:
    http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows-vista/Using-Paint
    http://www.extropia.com/tutorials/photoshop/line_tool.html ...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://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.