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.''"

133 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 lisaparratt · · Score: 5, Funny

      Chained up in the basement.

    2. 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
    3. Re:Where does this leave GIMP? by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Funny. Pulp Fiction joke about the Gimp. I laugh EVERY time!

      Rally thogh, there is a mild situational irony in moving Gimp from the Disc to an online annex...

      The Gimp was orgiginally envisioned to demonstrate the power and flexibility of free, desktop systems. The creators wanted to show Linux and free software "stone soup" development was capable of producing and supporting software that rivaled what was available as commercial offerings.

      One side effect of this was the generation of a new toolkit for the UI - GTK. It was so successful, that when the emerging KDE project chose the quasi-free Qt libraries, Miguel DeIcaza chose GTK as the cornerstone on which he would begin the GNOME UI - following many of the conventions and methods for contribution that made GIMP and early success.

      No GIMP? Then no GNOME and prolly no Ubuntu.

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    4. Re:Where does this leave GIMP? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      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.

    5. Re:Where does this leave GIMP? by beelsebob · · Score: 3, Informative

      Not forgetting on OS X Pixelmator which is a truly *excellent* piece of software

    6. 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.

    7. Re:Where does this leave GIMP? by websitebroke · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually, that's officially being worked on right now.

      Personally, I like the multi-window layout, but I'll certainly give the single-window UI a shot.

    8. Re:Where does this leave GIMP? by Hikeeba! · · Score: 2, Insightful

      GIMP was an attempt to rival commercial offerings? I'm sure the GIMP developers wanted to make the best software they could, but when you state it like that it just seems so painful.

      From where I sit GIMP is a mess and no where near as nice any many commercial offerings, so it seems they failed pretty badly there. I do like the fact that it exists to some extent and it is free. Though I almost always use an alternative if I can.

      Maybe I'm just really anal about code and quality control so I'm being too harsh here...

      --
      Smith & Wesson - The original point and click interface.
    9. Re:Where does this leave GIMP? by jedidiah · · Score: 2, Informative

      It actually alters the RED part of the eye. It won't just drop a blob of black on the image where ever you happen to click. It won't alter the image if there isn't a red eye there to be corrected.

      THIS is the problem with "moron interfaces". No one bothers to notice or care if the functional parts make sense.

      Oddly enough this makes the "complicated" interfaces easier to deal with since you have to clean up fewer mistakes and can be more crude with how you "aim" the tool.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    10. Re:Where does this leave GIMP? by Crudely_Indecent · · Score: 2, Informative

      The summary leaves a little of the story out. Per TFA, it's not included in the DEFAULT INSTALL, but isn't removed from the repositories and is still available for install.

      A simple sudo apt-get install gimp will install it on your system.

      The article makes it sound like Gimp won't be available. It may as well go on to list all of the other software that isn't installed by the default installer, but that list is extensive.

      --


      "Lame" - Galaxar
    11. Re:Where does this leave GIMP? by Chatterton · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Actually I LOVE the multi-window layout on a multiscreen setup (image on one screen, tools on the other). But love to HATE it on a single screen setup.

    12. Re:Where does this leave GIMP? by BrokenHalo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Why? Just because you learned to use Photoshop first? That isn't a good argument.

      The multi-window thing is perfectly logical and reasonable, it just requires you to discard the baggage of your preconceptions. From my perspective, having learned to use the Gimp first, I find Photoshop's interface unnecessarily cluttered and intrusive. Both get the job done just fine, but if I need to retouch an image or do an HDR rendering, I find the Gimp a better tool for the job.

    13. Re:Where does this leave GIMP? by timeOday · · Score: 2, Insightful

      there is a mild situational irony in moving Gimp from the Disc to an online annex...

      The online repository isn't an "annex," the disc is... raise your hand if you actually install new packages by digging around for a CD-ROM. Nobody? I use Ubuntu and Gimp and probably never would have noticed this.

    14. 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).

    15. Re:Where does this leave GIMP? by Will.Woodhull · · Score: 4, Interesting

      ...too limited for power users

      Uh, no. Not any more.

      I used Paint Shop Pro from nearly its beginnings until Jasc sold it to Corel. I tried Corel's first version (PSP v9 IIRC) and went back to Jasc's last version (PSP v8.1 or 8.2) since the Corel version offered nothing of significance except more idiot buttons ("click this and it will make your image better!). Then I moved to GIMP when I switched from Windows to Unbuntu-- 2007 / 2008, about 18 months in transition. Much of the transition involved learning GIMP's menus, and with changes in the last version I think this is now going to be easier for newcomers.

      If you are doing commercial image work for hardcopy printing, then you need to have at least one copy of Photoshop available for the specific tools it provides for that kind of stuff (CMYK color separation, etc). And you have probably gotten your formal schooling on Photoshop and it probably isn't worth it to you to build skills with any other interface.

      For everyone else, including commercial work for electronic presentation (PowerPoint, PDFs, web pages, texture and billboards in 3D modeling and animation, etc), PSP used to be an excellent low cost alternative to Photoshop. Upgrades were adding new significant new features and there was a large and active community providing an incredible amount of support. But Corel appears to be more focused on developing more idiot buttons for the digital camera amateur than in making improvements to the core code.

      Meanwhile, GIMP has gained significant new capabilities and is now the clear leader in all aspects of image preparation with two exceptions: it does not have the specialized tools for interfacing with hardcopy print shops; it uses a different menu structure and nomenclature than that used in Photoshop based schools. GIMP's core is under active improvement, with new releases happening more frequently than Photoshop or Corel can manage. There is a large community of users who are providing the same kind of support that PSP users used to enjoy.

      The GIMP has layering, masking, and filtering that is equivalent to Photoshop. It has a plugin capability and the community has provided a very broad range of additional features through this. It is a product that can do serious image work.

      Back to the main topic of this thread-- I think Ubuntu is right in dropping the GIMP from automatic inclusion. Those of us who are into serious image work will have no trouble adding it back in. Persons who are looking for quick fixes for their snapshots are better served by Picassa or something like that (I haven't done any work with F-Spot so I can't say anything about it).

      --
      Will
    16. Re:Where does this leave GIMP? by Abreu · · Score: 2, Informative

      In Ubuntu, newbies don't even have to call up a terminal

      Just open "Software Center" -> "Graphics" -> "Gimp" -> "Install"

      --
      No sig for the moment.
    17. 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.

    18. Re:Where does this leave GIMP? by the_womble · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I realize that it's limited in comparison

      I would like to know what the currently missing features are. When this has come up previously people have mentioned colour separation (there is now a plugin for that), bit depth (still a problem:, but you could use the CinePaint fork), adjustment layers (does this address it: http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/forums/thread1259.htm?), colour management (I assume there are specific missing features within this, as the GIMP has colour management) and the lack of Panatone colours (no FOSS software will ever have that because of the licensing fee).

      What else is still missing?

      Its a pity Cinepaint development seems to have slowed: if it got a bit more resources we would have a FOSS competitor that had a sufficient colour depth and a name taht is nt an embarrassment.

    19. Re:Where does this leave GIMP? by dimeglio · · Score: 2, Insightful

      GIMP's distinctive UI is a breath of fresh air in the world of UI cloning. However, this is a guaranteed fail in terms of user acceptance. I believe that a single UI metaphor is essential, even if it means cloning the UI of other popular applications. Case to point if the UI would have been simpler, IMHO it probably would have been included in Ubuntu. It would also encourage more people to use it instead of Phøtøshøp.

      --
      Views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of the author.
    20. Re:Where does this leave GIMP? by Daengbo · · Score: 2, Informative

      Hint -- GTK stands for GIMP ToolKit. Guess which came first.

    21. Re:Where does this leave GIMP? by AusIV · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Similar things have happened with other products like Audacity. My mother-in-law runs a dance studio and was banging ahead against the software she was using to mix tracks for a recital. I suggested Audacity, but she was convinced that because it was free it couldn't possibly be better than what she had. The next year I saw she was using Audacity and commented that I saw she had taken my advice. She told me that this wasn't a free program, that it had come with some piece of hardware she'd purchased. I shook my head and moved on, but I found it interesting that audacity was gaining a user base through inclusion with hardware.

    22. Re:Where does this leave GIMP? by Tetsujin · · Score: 2, Informative

      I thought that the Gimp was originally a tech demo for GTK that kind of got a little out of hand.

      No, originally it was Motif-based. (There was a period where people were trying to muddle along with Motif-alternatives like Lesstif, and use those to get things like GIMP running...) I believe the switch to GTK was about the same time they added layers (early versions had channels only, I think)...

      GTK was introduced via the GIMP project. It was originally the "GIMP Toolkit"

      I've honestly never understood all the complaints about the GIMP interface...

      --
      Bow-ties are cool.
    23. Re:Where does this leave GIMP? by pugugly · · Score: 4, Informative

      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
    24. Re:Where does this leave GIMP? by b4dc0d3r · · Score: 3, Interesting

      People like this, I usually say you're right, it isn't free. It comes bundled if you buy a computer with Linux. But for this software, the authors don't mind if you use it on Windows too.

      I'd be interested in what hardware it was bundled with. So interested I found this page actually:
      http://audacity.sourceforge.net/download/bundlers

      Sound cards, ADC audio capture, USB electric guitars (wtf is that anyway), other misc packages. If the software is good, people will put it wherever is needs to be. I guess GIMP is more useful as a toolkit than an application.

    25. Re:Where does this leave GIMP? by lahvak · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Actually, that's incorrect. GIMP was first made with Motif, and because of restrictions associated with Motif, the GIMP developers decided to create their own toolkit, GTK (aka the GIMP ToolKit). GIMP came first, GTK was later.

      As far as GIMP interface goes, it seems to be rather fashionable to complain about it, but I don't think it is that terrible. One thing I would really like to have is a simple way to create a custom menu or toolbox with most frequently used tools and filters. If that was easy to do, I would have nothing whatsoever against GIMPs user interface. Of course, having 16 bit channels would be nice.

      --
      AccountKiller
    26. 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.

    27. Re:Where does this leave GIMP? by spitzak · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Though dweebs here like to throw out buzzwords like CMYK and > 8 bits, the most obvious missing thing is that you cannot "group" the layers so that the compositing operation is done between them and then the result is overlayed. For instance you cannot non-destructively colorize a lineart layer and put it on top of a background, something that Photoshop makes easy.

      More than 3 channels (CMYK is one minor use of that) would be nice. In professional special effects graphics these are used mostly for mattes and effects channels and information such as the normals of the surfaces. Use for the printing "black" is a minor insignificant detail compared to these other things.

      Having worked with professional graphics quite a bit I have to say that "color management" is 95% bullshit. It is not possible to make a reflective printout the "same" as a light-emitting screen, anybody claiming this is lying.

      Photo manipulation and painting is helped considerably by not losing information on display, this means that on current 8-bit images and 8-bit displays, any method other than 1:1 mapping of the image values to the display is WRONG, and thus most "color management" is in fact harmful (dithering and error diffusion can resolve this problem some, but nobody is doing it because users don't like the slightly-visible patterns, 10-bit displays may help here).

      If you really want to manage actual light data, the most important step is to change the internal representation to a "linear" format where the emitted energy is proportional to the stored number, but the "color management" people refuse to do it because it would make "color management" (ie changing the primaries) into a trivial matrix transform and put them out of business. Also it is not practical in any integer-based storage format.

      I very much hope they forget completely about any integers > 8 bits. If you are going to use 16 bits then use ILM/Nvidia "half" floating-point format. Stop living in the previous century and pretending something Photoshop did then is actually modern...

    28. Re:Where does this leave GIMP? by nschubach · · Score: 2, Funny

      That would explain why it's more difficult than changing a tire to draw a circle in Gimp.

      --
      Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
    29. Re:Where does this leave GIMP? by frisket · · Score: 2, Informative

      The danger now is that F-Spot will grow [...]

      F-Spot truly sucks. Every time I try to use it's it's empty and wants to "import" stuff from my Photos directory all over again. The interface is ghastly, and it runs like a turd in porridge. The quicker someone can write a photo manager that works, the better.

    30. Re:Where does this leave GIMP? by Eponymous+Bastard · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Group layers and a single window interface are in current SVN.

      For everything else you'll have to wait a year or two until the Gimp developers integrate their new GEGL framework, revamping Gimp into something else entirely along the way. It'll use float-based RGB as its internal representation, but handle anything as input and output. The current implementation of GEGL is dog-slow though, so don't bother to try it.

      As for the GP's suggestion for adjustment layers, no it's not enough. And yes, Adjustment layers could be implemented without waiting for GEGL integration, but the Gimp developers refuse to do it worrying that it'll make the integration harder (And because they want to come up with a completely new UI for them).

    31. Re:Where does this leave GIMP? by NoobixCube · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm unsure of my facts here, so by all means correct me, but I think I remember reading that GIMP was never originally intended to be a free Photoshop alternative. It started life as a very basic image editor, and it's been shaped by continual ad-hoc alterations into something we can call a Photoshop alternative. I wouldn't say it's a good enough Photoshop alternative for the really high end users who utilize Photoshop to it's full potential, but it's definitely more than enough for 99% of the Photoshop pirates who think they need it just to cut and paste Bush's head onto Hitler's body (a.k.a, 4chan regulars).

      --
      Admit it. You post strawman arguments as AC so you get modded Insightful for refuting them, rather than Troll
  2. Only removed from default install by Albanach · · Score: 5, Informative

    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.

    1. 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.

    2. 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.
    3. Re:Only removed from default install by Clover_Kicker · · Score: 4, Informative

      If you want Slackware you know where to find it.

  3. Eh. by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 3, Informative

    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.

  4. Yep by elrous0 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    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.
    1. Re:Yep by lbbros · · Score: 3, Informative

      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
    2. Re:Yep by SaDan · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'd say you have no idea what the folks at Ubuntu are thinking. It's a huge app, and it takes up disk space. It's also not something your average Ubuntu user will ever use, so it makes sense to make room on the default install CD for other applications that may prove to be more useful to more people.

      I'm one of the folks who learned image editing in the Unix/Linux world, and have yet to touch Photoshop for anything image related.

    3. 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)?

    4. Re:Yep by nomadic · · Score: 2, Interesting

      And perhaps you don't know that the upcoming GIMP 2.8 will feature a "single window mode".

      Unless the GIMP team has a time machine, I think his points are valid. At least the GIMP fanboys aren't as bad as the Blender fanboys who will tell you to your face that Blender's GUI isn't confusing...

    5. Re:Yep by LWATCDR · · Score: 3, Funny

      Why is it boarder line stupid?
      2.8 is not out yet so the current version is still the one with the not so easy to use interface.
      I bet that it will be on the the Add remove menu if not Synaptic so what is the problem?

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    6. 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.

    7. Re:Yep by dsavi · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm not sure about being yelled at by the fanboys, but I don't think I've seen a single GIMP user, no matter how happy with GIMP, that doesn't want a Photoshop UI.

    8. Re:Yep by Rockoon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The problem extends far beyond the fact that GIMP spawns more windows than Internet Explorer 4.0 does when visiting an prOn site.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    9. Re:Yep by jedidiah · · Score: 3, Informative

      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.
    10. Re:Yep by MrHanky · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, most of you whiners don't seem to actually use it, and now you even make up arguments from the Canonical devs to support your unfounded claims. Of course fanboys will "shout you down"; you don't know what you're talking about.

    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:Yep by abigsmurf · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The number of little annoyances I have with the GIMP UI are immense.

      Why does closing the toolbox close the whole program?
      Why does it fail to minimise/restore in a non-glitchy way in XP?
      Odd menu choices (why is greyscale/indexed colour/etc in mode rather than colour?).
      Opening a single image to edit. You have to click the close button twice to close GIMP (but only if it's the last open window).

      There's nothing glaring wrong with GIMP, it's just all these minor interface issues all add up and make the program much more of a chore to use than it needs to be.

    13. Re:Yep by linebackn · · Score: 3, Interesting

      As a long time GUI critic I've never quite understood the resistance all these years towards using a single multiple document style window for graphics editing. The kind of graphics editing I do usually involves dozens of tiny images all open at the same time. In the "real world" desktop with paper and scissors it was once not uncommon for someone to use a cutting tray of some kind that could be moved and set aside without having to move or otherwise deal with dozens of individual image scraps.

      Obviously not everybody works the same way, and window managers/desktops these days are better at dealing with groups of windows, but it always seemed crazy not to at least have it as an option.

    14. Re:Yep by websitebroke · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm by no means a Photoshop power user, but I can get around in it and use it just fine. Personally, I'm much more comfortable in GIMP's UI setup at the moment.

      For example, the single window paradigm doesn't take advantage of Compiz's present windows feature. With my current KDE setup, I mouse to the lower right corner of the screen and it lays out all the windows in the workspace. Click on one, and off you go. With Photoshop, You have to sift through the windows manually.

      Honestly, I'm thinking it's just what you're used to using that makes you like one or the other, and it looks like GIMP will be giving us a choice between single and multi window in the near future. The single window mockups look rather good, and more usable than Photoshop in my opinion.

      Honestly, I think what GIMP really needs is 16 bits/channel image support (WTF guys?), adjustment layers, etc. That's what still keeps me opening up Photoshop, not the UI.

    15. Re:Yep by elrous0 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Oh man, I forgot about Blender. That UI makes GIMP's look like it was designed by Apple.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    16. Re:Yep by elrous0 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Oh, that's a bunch of BS. Apple manages to do great UI design without "pandering to Windows-refugee ingrates." It's just a question of too many OSS projects being done completely by coders who think they don't need to bring designers and technical writers onboard (hence the long list of OSS programs with great code but really shitty UI's and piss-poor documentation).

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    17. Re:Yep by Hatta · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I've never quite understood the resistance all these years towards using a single multiple document style window

      There is a single window, it's your desktop. If you want to switch away from that window, switch to another desktop. I'll never understand what's so hard about that.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    18. Re:Yep by elrous0 · · Score: 2, Funny

      The kind of girl I could pick up with the line "Hey, I'm really skilled with the GIMP" is probably a pretty scary gal.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    19. Re:Yep by jedidiah · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This sort of "why bother" and "the rubes can't tell" attitude is why iPhoto and Picasa are the Velveeta of image editors.

      I also suspect that those cheesy tools simply prevent "work" from being done entirely. Those tools only seem to be easy because of the convincing veneer. They really aren't. That was part of my point. "Doing it right" is actually HARDER with those "easy" image managers.

      Fortunately JPEG is an open standard.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    20. Re:Yep by MrHanky · · Score: 2, Informative

      There's a list of, what, six reasons to drop Gimp. None of them is a 'godawful' UI. Complex, yes. Poor? No.

      I'm just saying your arguments are too dishonest and far too vague to be taken seriously.

    21. Re:Yep by Dusty101 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not to try to be deliberately argumentative or sound like a fanboy, but I got used to using the GIMP without struggling too much while a penniless student. If there was something that I didn't know how to do, I could usually follow an online GIMP or Photoshop tutorial well enough to replicate the effect I was aiming for with the GIMP.

      Fast-forward to a couple of years ago, and I finally got around to trying a 30-day trial of Photoshop on my Mac. I simply couldn't ever seem to find what I was looking for in its menu and tools system - things just felt as if they were in the wrong places to me. Nowadays, I'm fortunate enough to find myself in a position to be able to buy a copy of Photoshop these days for my own personal use, and I'd like to be able to learn enough to claim that I'm fairly handy with Photoshop as well, but my (admittedly limited) experience with it has rather put me off the idea.

      For the record, I'm not any kind of professional graphic designer, & my use has been very limited, but I've got to state in all honesty that the GIMP works OK for my own relatively light use. Don't get me wrong: I know that Photoshop has some particular technical advantages (as amply detailed in other posts here), but the cost & (mostly) the time investment required for me to appreciate those is too great.

      This is a fairly rambling post, but my point here is this: while I freely admit that my own experience might just be another example of "Good Enough is the enemy of Best", I think it's not unreasonable to acknowledge that every user tends to get used to certain ways of doing things. Photoshop is widely used (and widely pirated) - so much so that it's become a verb - and so there are probably many more regular users worldwide; consequently, the general consensus is that that's what's intuitive to more people. After all, isn't that perhaps at least part of the reason that (e.g.) Windows is still so popular, and OpenOffice looks the way it does?

      Simply stating that the GIMP UI is "godawful" without providing some concrete justifications and suggestions for improvement is rather abstract, and not actually terribly helpful. "Make it more like Photoshop" doesn't count either, unless concrete examples of why the Photoshop way is actually better are also provided.

  5. 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 thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 5, Funny

      dude, finish your sentence! The suspense is killing me!

    2. Re:name change by muckracer · · Score: 2, Funny

      >> i dont mean to troll, but once the name changes

      > dude, finish your sentence! The suspense is killing me! ...the year of the Linux Desktop has arrived.

      TFIFY! :-)

    3. Re:name change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      dude, finish your sentence! The suspense is killing me!

      What he was trying to say is that once the name changes

    4. 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.
  6. I have no issue with this by C_Kode · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.

    1. 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
    2. Re:I have no issue with this by SaDan · · Score: 2, Insightful

      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.

    3. Re:I have no issue with this by C_Kode · · Score: 2, Insightful

      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?

    4. Re:I have no issue with this by Rude+Turnip · · Score: 2, Informative

      Add a layer to crop in GIMP? I use GIMP a lot and all I do is select an area and crop it. It sounds like you're talking about masking, which is overkill for cropping something.

    5. Re:I have no issue with this by grumbel · · Score: 2, Informative

      Gimp is a lot more intuitive than Photoshop if you're used to Gimp.

      It really isn't. Gimp lacks of toolbar is annoying (had to patch that in myself), the use of multiple windows gets in the way a lot, no proper line, circle, etc. tools (no, stroking/filling a selection is not the same), the palette editor is abominable, the brush dialog unsortable and there are many other weird little things, like that you have to Ctrl-Alt+mouse-button to just move a selection, that make Gimp less then perfect. And whats the point of the "Floating Selection", why isn't that a normal layer?

      The good thing is that Gimp is constantly improving, the bad thing is that it is doing so at a snails pace. Hopefully the availability of some competition will speed things up in the future, Krita is starting to look extremely good in terms of features, its just still a little to broken to be usable.

    6. Re:I have no issue with this by JohnnyBGod · · Score: 2, Insightful

      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?

  7. Nonsense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

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

    Oh, wait......

  8. Re:Fark.com photoshop contests? by sopssa · · Score: 3, Funny

    You are doing it wrong.

    This looks shopped.
    I can tell from some of the pixels and from seeing quite a few in my time.

  9. If GIMP is in universe by tepples · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'll just grab GIMP using apt.

    But if it's in "universe", Canonical won't sell tech support, and it'll probably lag behind in updates.

    It's about as close to Photoshop as you're going to get in a free application

    The more honest comparison is to Photoshop Elements, but otherwise, your point is valid.

    1. Re:If GIMP is in universe by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 4, Informative

      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.

    2. Re:If GIMP is in universe by kbielefe · · Score: 2, Insightful

      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.
    3. Re:If GIMP is in universe by deek · · Score: 2, Insightful

      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.

  10. My Linux Noobs love it by kcfoxie · · Score: 2, Insightful

    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.

  11. Don't forget Paint.NET by Nerdposeur · · Score: 4, Informative

    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.

    1. Re:Don't forget Paint.NET by ichimunki · · Score: 4, Informative

      Plus it's written in [expletive deleted] .NET, so it will probably never be available for Ubuntu

      That's funny, because Ubuntu is including F-Spot, which is written in C#.

      --
      I do not have a signature
    2. Re:Don't forget Paint.NET by b4dc0d3r · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It was cooler when it was open source. I stopped using it when they removed the source code download.

      Looks like they are trying to make a business out of it, with the new Donate button and registered LLC. Not that I have a problem with that, I just like having the source to stuff I use. Most of the time I don't even unzip it - but knowing it's there is reassuring.

  12. What is F Spot? by Sporkinum · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I looked in the repository for kubuntu 9.10 and didn't find anything with that name. What is it and where is it?

    --
    "He's lost in a 'floyd hole"
    1. Re:What is F Spot? by tylersoze · · Score: 4, Funny

      "What is it and where is it?"

      Are you sure didn't mean G Spot? :)

    2. Re:What is F Spot? by drumbug1 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Your google is broken, eh?

      apt-cache search f-spot
      sudo apt-get install f-spot
      http://f-spot.org

    3. Re:What is F Spot? by TheThiefMaster · · Score: 2, Informative

      "What is it and where is it?"

      Are you sure didn't mean G Spot? :)

      Which is the name of a program for identifying the codecs used in .avi files, so you know what to get to be able to play them.

      Seriously.

    4. Re:What is F Spot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The package name has a dash in it:

      apt-get install f-spot

      I was curious about it so I installed it and I am really unimpressed with the interaction design. I wanted to edit a photo, so I looked for the 'Open' option (there isn't one). They call it 'Import' for some reason. OK. Import it is. Now I see a dialog box asking for an import source. The default item in the drop-down box says "Select Folder". I click it and am presented with the default option ("Select Folder" without ellipses that indicate clicking would lead to more dialog) and no other option (a disabled item says "(No Cameras Detected)"). OK. Select Folder it is. Of course, I don't really let the bit about 'Folder' sink in. I mean, I want to open a damned JPEG file. Individually. OK? No, not OK. I could navigate to the directory where my file was, but the file itself was disabled. Why? Rename it from IMG_1234.JPG to mypic.jpg to see if capitalization was the problem. No. Oh... _folder_. I see. I have to import the entire folder? Well, ok, open a terminal and move mypic.jpg to its own (new) folder since I don't want to include the rest. (It turns out that isn't necessary because on the next step it asks me which files in particular I want to import.)

      At this point I have been overwhelmed with Bogon radiation and have decided F-Spot isn't for me. Which means it DEFINITELY isn't for less technically agile people.

      So... to continue. Now I want to resize my picture, which is probably the only thing I will need to do 60% of the time. I can't find the damned resize function. There's "Image Information" that includes a read-only text representation of the size. The "Photo" and "Edit" menus are no help. Maybe "Tools". No, "Tools" contains "Hash for Duplicates" and "Configure Screensaver". Are you serious? Hash for Duplicates? It is only because I have a background in computer science that I know which sense of the word Hash they mean, but given how bad the interaction design is here I imagine the developers were partaking in another sense of the word.

      The Sidebar (that's their term, not mine... I might call it a button bar) has functions like Crop and Adjust Colors. So I click Adjust Colors to see what I can do, and replaces the sidebar with a different UI that gives me a bunch of sliders. There is no obvious way to go back to the sidebar... oh I see the 'X' in the corner, so I click that. No, that's not it. Now it just removed the entire sidebar area and I don't know how to get it back. OK, hunt around in the menus. I find "View -> Components -> Sidebar" after way too long. I get my sidebar back, but I'm curious how the hell I'm supposed to adjust colors and then get the sidebar back. Oh, OK, there's a vertical scrollbar, with the 'Cancel' button way down there below the fold. Nice.

      So if Ubuntu is going to not include the GIMP, that is fine because their stated reason resonates, and GIMP really is overkill for the simple crop/resize/straighten/color-balance/remove-redeye/upload-to-facebook purposes most people will need. But if they think F-Spot is the cure to this problem, I think they are high on crack.

      Open source developers really need to learn a thing or two about interaction design. It doesn't matter how elegant your algorithms are or how clever your application architecture is if your interface is horrible. And I'm not talking about the mythical Aunt Tillie type of user, I'm talking about normal Linux desktop users who are smart, technically with it but very busy.

  13. PFref by muckracer · · Score: 5, Funny

    Zed: Bring out the Gimp.
    Maynard: Gimp's not installed.
    Zed: Well, I guess you're gonna have to go apt-get install him now, won't you?

  14. 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.

    1. Re:Yay. by vondo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Except for the millions of people, you know, using photo managers. F-Spot, digikam, iPhoto, Picasa, Lightroom, Aperture. Yup, no market for those.

  15. The name says what it does by tepples · · Score: 2, Informative

    why do the developers of gimp refuse to change the name?

    "GNU Image Manipulation Program" is a program published by the GNU project that manipulates images. As a descriptive name, it's no worse than "Microsoft Internet Explorer".

    1. 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.
    2. Re:The name says what it does by ArsonSmith · · Score: 3, Funny

      GIM is truly outrageous. Truly, truly, truly, outrageous!

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    3. 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
    4. 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.

  16. Re:Download size by vondo · · Score: 2, Informative

    I just installed it on my kubuntu laptop. It's an 8 MB download. I just installed Lightroom 3 on Windows the other day. That's a 120 MB download.

  17. Re:Download size by PixelSlut · · Score: 4, Informative

    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.

  18. 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.

    1. Re:Too bad, really by TrancePhreak · · Score: 2, Insightful

      that Ubuntu comes with serious productivity software, equivalents of which on Windows can cost hundreds or thousands of dollars

      I'm willing to wager that the majority of that software is also available for free on Windows. GIMP is a prime example.

      --

      -]Phreak Out[-
    2. Re:Too bad, really by interval1066 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No, its fine. You can still install GIMP if you want it. Everyone going on about what a bad move this is. Ridiculous. GIMP is a huge blob of software that I very rarely use. Why don't I use it often? Because the UI is NOT intuitive, its all over the place, and doesn't conform AT ALL to the SDI UI model that has proven to be the best UI model out right now (SDI: Firefox, IE. Tabs are ok, 16 different windows keep me searching for what I want, very bad design.) As a UI designer (as one of my hats) GIMP's design is very poor in my opinion, it stinks of being an afterthought of an application. For raster editors that have a superior UI in my opinion look at Carbon 14 or Inkscape, both Linux apps. However, for my money, although not a raster-based editor, take a look at LViewPro. This windows app has the best user interface ever. I spent very little time learning how to use it. Not something I can say about GIMP.

      --
      Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'
    3. Re:Too bad, really by Fallingcow · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Ah, The GIMP--the only application in the world that expects the user and WM to supply most of the UI features that other programs manage to provide on their own.

      God help you if you don't like whatever dumb shit settings you have to use to make The GIMP's interface suck less, or if you don't want to switch/upgrade your WM just because this one program has taken it upon itself to evangelically push a set of WM features and settings that aren't expected by any other application in the whole world.

      Or if you're running it on Windows. Then you're just fucked.

  19. Re:Download size by tepples · · Score: 2, Interesting

    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.

    If it's still on the DVD, then I have no complaint, as dial-up users are used to having to buy the DVD from a store like OSDisc.com.

  20. They've got this one backwards. by ProppaT · · Score: 3, Informative

    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."
    1. Re:They've got this one backwards. by Eugene+O'Neil · · Score: 4, Informative

      No, what it's REALLY about is the amount of space it takes up on an install CD, and the fact that even your proverbial Grandmother could figure out how to install it off the internet with one mouse click using Ubuntu's amazingly slick package management interface.

      This story should have been titled "Ubuntu speeds up install process for people who don't select Gimp", except that would make it too obvious that there is no story worth writing about here.

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

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  22. Curiously... by AliasMarlowe · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I remove F-Spot, which I neither like nor use. Actually I nearly despise it due to the hard-coded directory name stupidity introduced a couple of Ubuntu versions ago (every volume with a /photos directory was deemed to be from a digital camera, even if it was a 1TB internal fixed disk). The resulting moronic behavior of the file browser was really Ubuntu's fault, but F-Spot carries the stigma.

    Our raw photo processing is done with Bibble Pro and Noise Ninja, both of which sell native Linux versions. GIMP is a keeper for image editing, however, and gets quite a lot of use. Especially by my teenage daughter, who became a GIMP whiz as a pre-teen.

    --
    Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
    1. Re:Curiously... by ShieldW0lf · · Score: 2

      I second this. F-Spot is terrible. Makes a total clusterfucked mess of your filing system. I've hated it for years.

      --
      -1 Uncomfortable Truth
  23. 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 DJRumpy · · Score: 3, Informative

      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.

    3. Re:Another stupid move by ubuntu by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      I'm a graphics professional and have been using linux for about 10 years. I can safely say, all the times I've tried to use the GIMP even for simple tasks it's just pissed me off. The average user isn't going to attempt to use a program with that high of a learning curve with so little payoff. Online photo editing sites are better than this bloated piece of garbage.

      If the GIMP is supposed to be a pro grade piece of image editing software, how come they can't even get a professional to design the graphics on their website?

    4. 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.

    5. Re:Another stupid move by ubuntu by Macka · · Score: 2, Informative

      the artificial restrictions on root (hey - it's MY computer, not yours)

      What the hell are you talking about. This isn't windows, you don't have to and shouldn't be using the root account for day to day activities, but when you need it "sudo -s" gets you a nice little root shell and off you go. And if you really really want to login as root, it takes seconds to turn that on. Not having root enabled by default encourages people to use standard accounts and that's a good thing. If you don't like it, stop whining and change it to work the way you want to.

    6. Re:Another stupid move by ubuntu by jc42 · · Score: 2

      I'm a graphics professional and have been using linux for about 10 years. I can safely say, all the times I've tried to use the GIMP even for simple tasks it's just pissed me off.

      I'm not, and I have somewhat the same reaction. I've gotten ahold of one or more GIMP docs and tried to step through them to learn how to use it. I generally found that, although I could easily learn to tell it to do all sorts of things to an image, what it did was rarely what I expected, and couldn't be explained by reading the docs that I had. So I was able to use it to do all sort of damage to images, but I could rarely get it to make the changes that I wanted to make.

      Obviously, this was due to my ignorance of GIMP. Right; and that's why I was stepping through TFM, trying to learn. Each time, I decided that I didn't have the right FM for a novice like me. Maybe someday, I'll find an intro GIMP tutorial that actually teaches me how to make the changes that I want to make, rather than just frobbing the controls and watching amusing but uncontrollable damage being done. Until then, I don't think I'll consider using it for anything important.

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
  24. Re:Good by dbIII · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Yet another example of the post literate situation where everyone just wants things to be like that first of the type they see and nobody can bother to read any docs. The "weird interface" makes perfect sense with multiple virtual desktops or multiple screens, you'll see similar things creep into applications like photoshop just as things like undo crept in. Multiple workspaces are no longer just a *nix thing.
    To me photoshop was the odd interface because I encountered that after gimp and CAD programs - and then got flamed a great deal when I asked where undo was. The response from several was "real professionals save frequently and will never need undo" along with a prolonged game of kick the newbie that never pretended to be anything else in the first place. The reality is just like CAD and solid modelling programs. There are too many options to make a simple interface possible thus both suck until you've used them a lot.

  25. not a surprise by smoker2 · · Score: 4, Funny

    I look forward to the day when Canonical finally get rid of that pesky Linux thing from their default install. I mean all it does is confuse people who can't run their walmart bought software on it. Die Ubuntu die.

    A distribution for those who can't find their ass with both hands.

  26. Re:Download size by jgtg32a · · Score: 5, Funny

    It would still be faster to download it, Canonical says delivery takes 5-6 wks

    The Windows GIMP installer is 16MB if that takes 5 hours to download it would mean it takes 9.11 days to download the full 700MB ISO.

    Wow I just realized something if it take 5 hours to download 16MB that is about 7Kb/s. At that rate it take 9.11 days to download 700MB. See the relationship 700, 7, and 9.11.

    It means that GWB knew about 9-11. 9-11 was perfectly executed hence the 7, the 700 club is a conservative organization so that means GWB new. Canonical fits in because Linux is a Communist system and they want to found a NWO.

    PEOPLE OPEN YOUR EYES

  27. 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.

  28. What are you talking about? by JSBiff · · Score: 2, Insightful

    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.

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

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

  30. 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.

  31. You are not looking for alternatives. by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 2, Interesting

    You are looking for rip-offs.

    An alternative to anything will not ape mindlessly the thing it is intending to supplant, people developing similar tools arrive to different conclussions, specially when it comes to usability.

    Usability is certainly related to familiarity (most people that say something is not "user friendly" or "intuitive" what they really mean is that they are used to a piece of software and that they will never learn anything else because they have invested so much on the previous tool.

    The GIMP certainly is no drop in replacement for Photoshop, but deriding it because it isn't is childish in extreme.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
    1. Re:You are not looking for alternatives. by Kjella · · Score: 2, Insightful

      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
  32. This IMHO is a nonissue by McNihil · · Score: 2, Insightful

    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.

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

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  34. Ubuntu Studio by kayoshiii · · Score: 4, Informative

    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.

  35. 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.

  36. Ubuntu Brainstorm Idea #110 by SgtChaireBourne · · Score: 2, Insightful

    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.
  37. People who can't install packages... by Pausanias · · Score: 2, Interesting

    will have trouble with the GIMP. Anyone who can use GIMP productively is also technical enough to install it from the universe repositories.

    Yes, I also remove F-Spot because I always remove all mono-based software from my system---I'd prefer my Ubuntu system without any Microsoft-designed software.

    1. Re:People who can't install packages... by bigstrat2003 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      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
  38. 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.

  39. Re:Download size by nschubach · · Score: 2, Funny

    I can't believe you missed the obvious relationship to the shape of a CD and the shape of a UFO... It's much bigger than GWB. It's an alien invasion, but they are trying to make our government look like incompetent boobs so we will welcome our alien overlords as a better alternative to the system we have now.

    --
    Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
  40. shoot the decision-makers at Gnome by quixote9 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Honestly. F-spot is awful. Gthumb actually works -- you can do complicated stuff like decide which directory you want photos to be in. First thing I do with a new ubuntu install is dump f-spot, install gthumb, go through the effing rigamorole to make it the default app for that, and curse a whole bunch. For any actual image processing, it's gimp. Duh.

    The gnome devs have so many stupid defaults sometimes I wonder what planet they live on. Just one example: you can't rename the desktop icons for media. It's "8GB-drive" or whatever. I have about three separate USB thumbdrives, all 8GB, and no way to name them something useful because I'm such a dumb user that would confuse me.

    The only one with enough clout to kick those guys is probably Shuttleworth. So why in hell isn't he doing it?

  41. Gimp interface by jdc18 · · Score: 2, Informative

    I use gimp a lot, and it is quite powerfull, but the interface sucks. I dont like having this many floating panels and windows. Inkscape on the other hand is really good. I showed to some illustrator users and they liked. It is simple, light and fast.