Slashdot Mirror


Ubuntu Replaces F-Spot With Shotwell

climenole writes "Finally! The much discussed F-Spot vs. Shotwell battle is over. The new default image organizer app for Ubuntu Maverick 10.10 is going to be Shotwell. This is a much-needed change; F-Spot was simply not enough. Most of the times when I tried F-Spot, it just keeps crashing on me. Shotwell on the other hand feels a lot more solid and is better integrated with the GNOME desktop. Shotwell is also completely devoid of Mono."

73 of 361 comments (clear)

  1. um who cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    So the summary is just copy/paste from some blog.
    Gnome made the change, not Ubuntu.
    That version of Shotwell has been out for well over a month.

    This is not news, for nerds or for anyone.

    1. Re:um who cares? by Yfrwlf · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's news for Ubuntu users, which comprises probably most Linux users, so it is relevant and is news for them, just as major Fedora changes are news-worthy as well but less so since Fedora is less used, at least for desktops I would argue, but who knows, maybe it's equal or more, that's besides the point that they are both news worthy IMO.

      Ubuntu bashing is amusing, but pretty infantile. Fedora uses pretty much the same programs, with a different non-universal package manager, just as DEB isn't universal (a major gripe of mine about Linux standards and software accessibility on Linux, but off-topic).

      Now, it shouldn't matter to any distro users, and none of this should be news worthy, because users should be able to get the latest version of any program easily without relying on someone to create a PPA (which still haven't been made ultra-easy to deal with, and confounds new users), but again, that's going back to the above off-topic point. The sad reality is the default apps that distros ship does matter to distro users users because they will most likely not get the new version, and many not even know Shotwell exists until they install or upgrade to the newer distro version.

      --
      Promote true freedom - support standards and interoperability.
  2. On the other hand... by greg_barton · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Shotwell on a other hand...

    For fuck sake, editors.

    EDIT!

    1. Re:On the other hand... by lexDysic · · Score: 5, Funny

      For fuck sake, editors.

      EDIT!

      You must be new he... wait, your UID is 5551? And you're complaining about this now?

      Sir, I am in awe of your patience. Carry on.

      --
      Think! It ain't illegal yet!
      George Clinton
    2. Re:On the other hand... by Improv · · Score: 5, Funny

      Pah. People with four or less numbers in their UID are just a myth.

      --
      For every problem, there is at least one solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.
    3. Re:On the other hand... by ultrapenguin · · Score: 5, Funny

      really?

    4. Re:On the other hand... by bmo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      >For fuck sake, editors.

      "Trolling is a art" - Anonymous

      --
      BMO

    5. Re:On the other hand... by GraZZ · · Score: 3, Funny

      According to your mom I'm more of a legend...

    6. Re:On the other hand... by RLiegh · · Score: 2, Funny

      Sure, I guess that works until you can install Emacs, but I'd hardly call it a real editor....

    7. Re:On the other hand... by whoop · · Score: 5, Funny

      I've heard of these 4-digiters, but never seen one myself...

    8. Re:On the other hand... by grrussel · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yes.

    9. Re:On the other hand... by R2.0 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Re:On the other hand... (Score:5, Funny)
      by whoop (194) writes: Alter Relationship on Mon Jun 14, '10 05:48 AM (#32562604) Homepage

      I've heard of these 4-digiters, but never seen one myself...

      Ah, the irony of Slashdot UID's - it's the only dick measuring contest where the winner is the smallest one...

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    10. Re:On the other hand... by mhall119 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's not impossible, it just always results in this: http://xkcd.com/716/

      --
      http://www.mhall119.com
  3. If someone integrates F-spot into gnome..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Shouldn't it then be named G-spot? If a program of such a name were to exist, would any male users be able to find it, let alone use it?

    1. Re:If someone integrates F-spot into gnome..... by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 2, Informative

      Shouldn't it then be named G-spot? If a program of such a name were to exist, would any male users be able to find it, let alone use it?

      G-spot

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    2. Re:If someone integrates F-spot into gnome..... by Culture20 · · Score: 5, Funny

      If it's got Mono, I'm not touching it. No wonder it's slow and tired.

  4. Stupid remarks by akanouras · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Most of the times when I tried F-Spot, it just keeps crashing on me.

    Do we need such silly commentary?

    I'm using Kubuntu btw, so I couldn't care less about F-Spot.

    1. Re:Stupid remarks by anethema · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Especially the weird shift between past and present within the same sentance.

      --


      It's easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them.
    2. Re:Stupid remarks by Abcd1234 · · Score: 5, Funny

      I'm using Kubuntu btw, so I couldn't care less about F-Spot.

      Well, thanks for taking the time to post a comment in an article about a product you "couldn't care less about". That's very generous of you, and I'm sure we're all better for reading your insightful words.

    3. Re:Stupid remarks by hedwards · · Score: 2, Funny

      Actually, that was intentional. He tried it several months ago and it's still crashing.

  5. Isn't it all about options? by grasshoppa · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Shotwell is also completely devoid of Mono.

    I take issue with this last line. I LIKE c#/.net. If I get to use it in more places, this is a good thing.

    Isn't the whole shtick about open source the fact that we get more options?

    --
    Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
    1. Re:Isn't it all about options? by ie2fleen · · Score: 3, Informative

      We all know that Mono is the cause of F-Shot's stability issues...right?

    2. Re:Isn't it all about options? by slimjim8094 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The concern is not so much about the language itself as with Microsoft. They've *said* they won't sue anyone using/writing for Mono, but since they've threatened to do some very similar things and I'm not so sure I trust them.

      In any case, the intensity with which Icaza has been pushing Mono, plus his ties with Microsoft, scare the crap out of me.

      So please, feel free to develop with it. But I'm not so sure I'll be installing Mono to run your app, because I try to keep it off otherwise.

      --
      I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
    3. Re:Isn't it all about options? by Abcd1234 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Meh, as long as F-Spot and Mono remain in the repository, I have little issue with them moving to Shotwell if they feel it's the better product (for whatever reason, be it phantom legal issues, or legitimate stability issues).

    4. Re:Isn't it all about options? by Boltronics · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The real issue is with patents. Stallman wrote about this last year.
      http://www.fsf.org/news/dont-depend-on-mono

      Similar to WINE in a way, it's good to have an open source project to allow us to run more software. However, that doesn't mean that software developers should make their applications depend on them when specifically targeting a GNU/Linux environment - it's an unnecessary risk.

      --
      It's GNU/Linux dammit!
    5. Re:Isn't it all about options? by A+beautiful+mind · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I take issue with this last line. I LIKE c#/.net. If I get to use it in more places, this is a good thing.

      Isn't the whole shtick about open source the fact that we get more options?

      Open source is about options, true. So you're saying that Mono should be included as a required dependency in the base system of Ubuntu because you like it, but fuck all the people who don't like Mono for various reasons? This clearly isn't about more options. Leaving Mono "optional" is about more options.

      --
      It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
      Be yourself no matter what they say
    6. Re:Isn't it all about options? by jmorris42 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      > I LIKE c#/.net.

      Someone always pops up saying something like this anytime Mono is mentioned. But if C#/.Net/Mono is so great why hasn't anything really great been created with it in all the years it has existed? Remember when Microsoft was going to recode pretty much all of their userland? yea right. Reminds me of when belief in the Java hype pushed Corel under as they thought they could write a cross platform office suite with it. So show me something Mono/.Net based that that is awesome and where the choice of platform was something more a technical than a political/religious decision.

      But beyond that, the fact is we are talking about a technology controlled by Microsoft. Many people simply do not trust them, and for good reason. So using Mono to allow otherwise foreign code to run is unobjectionable. Creating core subsystems of the Free Software/Open Source environment isn't. Any distribution that breaks if Mono is removed is going to be unacceptable to a large enough subset of users that it simply isn't likely to happen in any of the top ten distros.

      --
      Democrat delenda est
    7. Re:Isn't it all about options? by LingNoi · · Score: 4, Informative

      The question is whether people like having Mono installed on their system, and the answer is no.

      No it's not. Ubuntu has never been a distribution for Free software activists. Ubuntu has always been about "linux for humans". That's why there is always fuss over the nvidia drivers, that's why they made a fuss over the firefox branding. If your primary concern is with freedom then you should be on a different distribution such as Gnewsense or Debian. Ubuntu however has always been about ease of use over making things difficult and just so we're clear here.. Both F-Spot and Shotwell are Free Open Source Software, it's just that some people don't like using mono.

      The REAL question however is, does this new Photo Manager provide an adequate replacement for the Ubuntu user and the answer is "not yet". It doesn't import certain images, it imports duplicates, its UI is not that great compared to f-spot and it has less import/export options then f-spot. Regardless of how you feel about Mono it sucks for Ubuntu's target audience which doesn't care about Mono or C#, they care about if they can use it.

      I think the only news worthy part of this is that it's a ridiculous decision that they're considering to switch to an inferior product by default. Add on the fact that they removed GIMP by default from Lucid it means that there will now be no way by default to edit images in Ubuntu for the next release that won't open in Shotwell. It's just completely stupid and I doubt Canonical will stick with this decision. Ubuntu is popular because they don't do this kind of thing.

    8. Re:Isn't it all about options? by ratboy666 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      There are a few developers who I feel indebted to. Icaza is one. I use Midnight Commander every day. I give these developers "the benefit of the doubt". Icaza is up there with Bram Moolenaar (VIM). VIM is more important, but MC also "gets it done". And has for almost 15 years.

      So, when Icaza said "Mono is important", I tried to suspend my disbelief. And, it was difficult for me; the JVM also had a 15 year history for me.

      I'm STILL trying to see it. I "dutifully" installed Moonlight into Firefox. I've tried F-Spot. But, there appears to be no broad-base support for the CLR, even now. No CLR support for Unix... To quote a Microsoft MVP

      "Shinma,

      I would not recommend trying to run .NET on a unix platform. While
      there are attempts (there is a CLR based on a source project released by MS
      named ROTOR, and there is also the MONO project), not all of the
      functionality is there.

      What are you trying to do? Which parts of the framework do you want to
      leverage? I think that there might be an ASP.NET implementation up and
      running.

      --
      - Nicholas Paldino [.NET/C# MVP]"

      Now, MONO claims to have Solaris support, but I haven't yet tried it (can you get support for this from Novell?) And what about AIX and HP-UX?

      JAVA supports these platforms, and so appears to be a more universal delivery system.

      Was Icaza wrong? Maybe. It is possible that the CLR offers features that are not possible with the JVM (I don't know, the only thing I have personally done in this space is a COBOL to JVM system, and I haven't ever really looked at CLR -- after all Alchemy offers a commercial COBOL to CLR compiler already).

      Now, I have never stressed F-Spot, but what I did try appeared to work just fine. I'm all for competition, and if the CLR is superior to the JVM, let it win! I just don't understand why it hasn't been pushed into the Unix space. Are IBM, HP and Oracle wrong?

      Just curious on the thoughts of some fellow developers here. Especially from those companies. Some insight would be valuable.

      Thanks, Ratboy666

      --
      Just another "Cubible(sic) Joe" 2 17 3061
    9. Re:Isn't it all about options? by petermgreen · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Ubuntu seems to have decided that the best time to make risky decisions is the release immediately after a LTS because if it ends up sucking people can stay on the lts without any worries about support disappearing.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    10. Re:Isn't it all about options? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The question is whether people like having Mono installed on their system, and the answer is no. It's like requiring Java or Flash.

      ... or Perl, Python or Ruby. When did you last excise those from your system? Do you avoid using GUI apps written in Python as a matter of principle?

      Besides which, Mono will never be anything but a half-arsed implementation of what's available on Windows.

      Well, no, not really. Gtk#, for example, is available on Windows, but only as part of Mono.

    11. Re:Isn't it all about options? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm all for competition, and if the CLR is superior to the JVM, let it win! I just don't understand why it hasn't been pushed into the Unix space. Are IBM, HP and Oracle wrong?

      No, they just don't want to embrace a competing technology, especially the one where design choices are by and large made by said competitor.

      And Microsoft isn't exactly interested in providing first-class CLR experience on Unix for obvious reasons.

      So you end up with Mono, which is largely volunteer-driven. Of course that is going to lag behind a major commercial project such as Sun JVM.

  6. Re:Picasa by Dahamma · · Score: 2

    You're just walked square into the middle of the "free software" vs "open source" debate. Now they've got you right where they want you, there is no escape!

    Picasa is free (and awesome) but not open source - so Ubuntu and Fedora will never ship it.

  7. Curing Mono by Improv · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm always glad to hear about mono being used less on Linux.

    --
    For every problem, there is at least one solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.
    1. Re:Curing Mono by PixelSlut · · Score: 5, Informative

      Yes, I do.

      Microsoft has a lot invested in a lot of things other than .NET, so I think you're making a really large leap here to assume that they're talking about .NET here. Every major software company out there has invested into different things, and they'll protect their IP up to the point where it no longer benefits them to restrict it.

      It's in Microsoft's best interests to allow people to use .NET and C# everywhere, period. They've already stated that they're applying the Community Promise to their patents so that they won't sue people over them.

      Mono, the framework, is fantastic and it's really sad that RMS and the BoycottNovell tards are spreading so much FUD over it. And that some of you here on Slashdot are perpetuating that.

      Last year at the Gran Canaria Desktop Summit, Cody Russell asked Richard Stallman if there was anything that Microsoft could do to ease his fears of patent threats, and he said that there was. Microsoft could come out and publicly state that .NET was open to use and promise not to sue people over it. Days later they did exactly that and Richard did not change his opinion.

    2. Re:Curing Mono by Seth+Kriticos · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yup. The first thing I usually do when installing Ubuntu now a days is:

      sudo aptitude purge mono-gac libmono2.0-cil -y

      This also removes F-Spot, Tomboy and Gbrainy, none of which I particularly miss.

    3. Re:Curing Mono by devent · · Score: 4, Insightful

      ECMA 334 and CLI is a small subset of what you call C# and what Mono is implementing. What about .NET, Asp.net, Windows Forms, which make C# any useful in the first place?

      If you want a managed and widely available language and framework, why you don't just use Java, Python, Php, Perl, Ruby and so on, which are completely free, which out any patents and are community controlled? There are available today, well tested, have a lot more tools and libraries as C#/Mono. In addition, you are not using a tool that is constantly behind the one company that is controlling all aspects of C# and .NET.

      The other question is, why anyone should even use Mono in the first place? The only reason for what Mono is good, is a replacement for .NET. But that's not going to happen, because MS have no interest in making C#/.NET available to other platforms than Windows.

      You are right, MS is interested that anyone using C#/.NET everywhere; but only if they are using it on Windows.

      --
      http://www.mueller-public.de - My site http://www.anr-institute.com/ - Advanced Natural Research Institute
    4. Re:Curing Mono by rubycodez · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The promises are largely meaningless and empty.

      http://www.osnews.com/story/21858/FSF_Microsoft_s_Community_Promise_Empty_

      the mono framework is inferior crap, F-Spot regularly crashes and often brings down x display manager with it.

      you MS shill boys are amusing. Microsoft has done so much evil over the last 20 years, stifling innovation and competition, and you want to pretend it's professional and balanced to treat them as a normal company.

  8. Gqview by phrostie · · Score: 2, Informative

    or what ever they call it now

    1. Re:Gqview by commrade · · Score: 4, Informative

      geeqie is what it's called under the new Author. Crappy name but it really is the best gtk image viewer.

  9. Re:Next on the list... by jpobst · · Score: 4, Informative

    Not to toot my own horn, but that's Pinta (http://pinta-project.com/).

    It's not ready yet to be a default application, but it's quickly getting closer. :)

  10. Re:who cares if it uses mon or not by LingNoi · · Score: 4, Informative

    I just downloaded shotwell from the PPA in the blog and here is my little test..

    I made a folder with some random images. I put all the images in a sub folder and made another subfolder with an extra copy of one of the images in a different folder. I did this because this best represents my photo folder. It has lots of images in different places and some of them are the same image because an early version of f-spot messed it up.

    I then loaded up shotwell and did an import, then got this error..

    2 photos successfully imported.

    4 unsupported photos skipped.
    /home/***/Desktop/photo_test/blah/Screenshot-1.png
    /home/***/Desktop/photo_test/blah/Screenshot.png
    /home/***/Desktop/photo_test/blah/Screenshot-3.png
    /home/***/Desktop/photo_test/blah/Screenshot-4.png

    The 2 photos that it successfully imported were the same photo. F-Spot has a feature to not import the same photo twice even if the filename differs which is handy. For me this is no where near f-spot technically.

    It can't even import PNGs. What use is an photo manager that can't import images..

  11. Re:Great, now get rid of XSANE by gslavik · · Score: 2, Informative

    Works with my camera (Logitech 9000) and my scanner (Canon u1240n aka Lide30) without any issues. The scanner was a nice surprise because installing the windows drivers for that was voodoo. Yes, Canon and Linux, it just works (tm). (I really didn't expect it to.)

  12. Re:Picasa by isilrion · · Score: 2, Interesting

    You're just walked square into the middle of the "free software" vs "open source" debate. Now they've got you right where they want you, there is no escape!

    Picasa is free (and awesome) but not open source - so Ubuntu and Fedora will never ship it.

    I think you have it backwards. The "open source" crowd would happily use non-free software if they believe it is the best. The "free software" crowd would not touch Picasa. See this article for an example (jump to "bitkeeper issue").

    You may be confused because of the two meanings of the word "free". It is sad that in the English language, the word for a concept as great as "freedom" is the same as the word for the meager idea of "no cost".

    Of course, there are several shades of grey in between the two camps, but that is the main difference.

    (That said, neither Ubuntu nor Fedora are very strong supporters of "free software"... specially not Ubuntu. It wouldn't surprise me that one of them decided to include picasa)

  13. Re:who cares if it uses mon or not by retchdog · · Score: 4, Interesting

    just had the same experience. png support will be added in 0.6. it's kind of ridiculous, but whatever, it's in 0.x. also going to fullscreen and then back appears to totally fuck the interface (ubuntu lucid).

    also: no way (?) to zoom into images.

    I don't know if I like the event paradigm. They should combine it with a date-based view like f-spot. My pictures are a combination of daily snapshots and events. Also I'd like a "random crap from the internet" dumppile which is totally separate from my life... Kind of like keeping Playboys away from the family photo album. :-/

    --
    "They were pure niggers." – Noam Chomsky
  14. Shotwell is beta by EEPROMS · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As much as I like having one less set of libs to install I have to say shotwell is way behind F-Spot on the usability front. I would say Shotwell needs another year to mature before it gets even near what F-spot is "now". Ubuntu is a key representation of Linux on the desktop and if users have to deal with a very beta experience of shotwell I dare say it wont reflect positively on Linux as a whole (I personally prefer Digikam over F-Spot).

    1. Re:Shotwell is beta by datakid23 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      +1 for digiKam over either F-spot or Shotwell - one of the first things I do on a new machine for the relatives is to install digikam.

    2. Re:Shotwell is beta by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      And in that vein, why doesn't Ubuntu go back to gThumb? That was the default camera app till 8.04 Hardy. F-Spot as introduced was comparatively bloated, crash-happy, and didn't respect the directory structure so many of us already had our pictures in. The switch to F-Spot didn't make sense then, and I'm not surprised it's being dropped now, but why Shotwell-beta over going back to gThumb?

      Like, is it personal? Or are there actual feature reasons for avoiding gThumb that I've managed to miss?

    3. Re:Shotwell is beta by timbo234 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Why try to re-invent the wheel at all with Shotwell, what's wrong with digikam? The disk space required for KDE libs is insignificant on modern computers (especially compared to the size of the average person's photo collection).

      Is it the irrational fear that non-technical people will be confused by a GUI interface that looks slightly different? Because that's what they get in Windows all the time and they seem to cope.

      --
      Pre-canned Evolution Links for all those Slashdot holy wars.
    4. Re:Shotwell is beta by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Ditto for digikam. Swapping out f-spot for digikam is one of the first things I do on a new Ubuntu install.

      As a rule, I don't use any media manager that "imports" my media into its own database or filesystem structure (I'm looking at you, iTunes, f-spot, and rhythmbox). Digikam respects my directory structure. It does basic editing, tagging, organization, and easily exports to external editors. It's fast, it's clean, and it's mostly stable. If it dies, it doesn't take my photos with it. It sounds like Shotwell is just more of the same.

  15. Features by lahvak · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I have never heard about shotwell, so I went to its website (it would be nice if the article actually included a link to that). As far as I can tell, there are some important features missing from shotwell. Namely, there is no information about raw, integration with ufraw or another raw developing software, editing photos in external editors (GIMP), or running external filters on photos.

    Also, it does not seem to have as many export options as f-spot.

    I am definitely not happy with f-spot, and always keep looking for a replacement, but so far I was unable to find one, and, as far as I can tell, shotwell with its current set of features is not going work for me.

    --
    AccountKiller
    1. Re:Features by Will.Woodhull · · Score: 2

      I too am unhappy with F-Spot. It seems to always be the most awkward place in my workflows, no matter what I am doing with the images.

      But it sounds like shotwell would be moving in the wrong direction.

      Anyone here familiar with F-Spot's performance wrt upgrades? Can we expect improvements in F-Spot at a steady pace, or is it a moribund project? I'm thinking that the next version of F-Spot might be closer to what would make me happy (Could we get a Linux version of IrfanView? I don't suppose IrfanView would run under wine in a way that would play well with GIMP, Inkscape, and Blender... but has anyone tried this?)

      --
      Will
    2. Re:Features by JanneM · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There also seems to be no support for hierarchical tags or for having many tags in general, just a linear dump of all tags you've got. Not so much fun when you have tags in the many hundreds, and when you want one tag to actually generate two or more tags in the final taglist.

      And little to no support for having multiple versions of an image; the only thing seems to be this: "Shotwell stores your edits in a database and applies them on the fly as necessary.". Which is great fun, I guess, if your original image is a 300Mb MF film-scan and you have to wait for 30 seconds while edits are applied whenever you want to see another of your versions. In fact, doesn't this feature pretty much preclude using external tools altogether?

      F-spot is pretty stable for me by now, and it can cope with the amount of images I have in a way that no other organizer tool I've tried on linux can. There's a few missing features still - a "light table" mode, where you can collect and compare a set of images directly would be great - but it works fairly well if you have to keep track of a largish number of images from very different sources.

      --
      Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
    3. Re:Features by devent · · Score: 2, Informative

      Try Gwenview. It have all kinds of exports, batch processing, tools, crop, resize, red eyes removal and perhaps more.

      --
      http://www.mueller-public.de - My site http://www.anr-institute.com/ - Advanced Natural Research Institute
    4. Re:Features by QBasicer · · Score: 2, Informative
      I just had a look inside their git news (http://git.gnome.org/browse/f-spot/tree/NEWS) and saw:

      f-spot 0.7.0 - Jun 16 2010 - Full Steam Ahead!

      • First release of the unstable 0.7 development series. Massive changes.
      • Reparenting and detaching support
      • A new Mallard-based documentation
      • No longer embeds flickrnet, uses distribution copy
      • Adoption of a large amount of Hyena functionality
      • No longer embeds gnome-keyring-sharp
      • Completely rewritten import, much faster and less memory hungry
      • No longer use gphoto2-sharp, now uses gvfs which is less crash-pron [SIC]
      • Fix Facebook support
      • Modernized unit tests
      • Revamped build
      • Much improved duplicate detection (much faster too)
      • Mouse selection in Iconview
      • Image panning support using middle mouse button
      • Timeline slider now restricted to the size of the window
      • Over 90 bugs closed

      So it looks promising in the short term. Perhaps there's been a bit of pressure on them? Too little too late?

      --
      x86, oh yes, I'm pro.
    5. Re:Features by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Have you tried Digikam? The interface is a bit complex... but if you use ufraw, that shouldn't daunt you. (-: It also supports external editors ("Open with..."), but for most edits I find it's built in editor to be superior and fast (cropping, colour & white balance correction, etc).

  16. Re:huh? by LingNoi · · Score: 5, Informative

    There is this discussion from 2009..
    https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel-discuss/2009-December/010173.html

    and this one from May 2010..
    https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-desktop/2010-May/002569.html

    Apart from that I can't find anything about a decision being made.

  17. Re:Next on the list... by lahvak · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The problem is, I believe, that majority of people using GIMP for image editing would not use these buttons (I use GIMP quite heavily, and I know I would never use them), so for them (us), such buttons would just end up cluttering already pretty complicated user interface.

    People often complain about GIMP user interface, which in my opinion is pretty good. The main problem IMHO is that the user interface is not flexible or configurable enough. For example the toolbox. When I bought my actual toolbox, the kind that sits in your garage, it came with a bunch of tools. I tossed half of them out, and replaced them with other tools, more useful for the way I work. However, I cannot do that with the GIMP toolbox. The same with menus. There is no easy way to reorganize the menus. I would like to, in addition to the existing menus, create a menu that would contain all commands that I use on daily bases for photo editing. In another menu, I would put all the command for creating and editing certain types of mathematical graphs, and so on.

    GIMP is very flexible and powerful program, but its user interface is rigid and does not allow you to easily use all the flexibility and power. Unfortunately, most people complaining about the GIMP user interface seem to want even more rigid interface, with a single window and some sort of MDI interface. That, IMNSHO, would be a huge step backward.

    --
    AccountKiller
  18. Good, I hated F-Spot by kuriharu · · Score: 2, Insightful

    F-spot makes duplicates of my photos. Good riddance! One copy of each pic is enough, thank you!

  19. Re:Great, now get rid of XSANE by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Interesting

    XSANE should never be made available. The GUI is a complete mess, looking like something that belongs on the Amiga. Also, it has yet to work with a single scanner or webcam I throw at it.

    xsane, or at least its libraries, forms the core of every scanner program for Linux worth using. The GUI is about the same as typical scanner programs released by manufacturers, which is to say it's weak but functional. Also, it has worked with every single scanner I have thrown at it for years and years... HP, Canon, Mustek... and I've been through about eight or nine scanners since I dropped Windows. In fact, my current scanner is an HP scanner for which there is no Windows 7 driver, the last release was on Vista, so the prior owners sold it. My prior scanner was another HP scanner for which there were no drivers after Windows XP. The one before that was a Mustek scanner which also last had XP drivers.

    The plural of anecdote is not data, but you're outnumbered.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  20. Yet another application rewritten in Gnome... by Per+Cederberg · · Score: 3, Interesting

    As long as developers keep rewriting apps from scratch every 2-3 years, they'll never become truly stable or usable. And they won't progress much beyond tech demos or the basic feature checklists.

    When will we see true progress in integration, usability or features?

    1. Re:Yet another application rewritten in Gnome... by sohp · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This is the single biggest failing of the FOSS ecosystem.

      Someone starts a piece of software and gets some of the desired features working. Shortly after that, someone else, either working on the project or using it, decides one of several problems plague the program. Either it's development is too slow, it has crummy architecture, someone else thinks they can do better, philosophically or technically, or they are half-baked programmers who look at existing code, can't figure it out, and decide to start over from scratch. Or maybe the project's lead(s) decide that their way of doing things, technically or philosophically, is the only "right" way, and hit would-be contributors over the head with attitude (I'm looking at for example developers of VLC and cdparanoia, not to mention the issue of Linux kernel schedulers and sound subsystem).

      So we end up with multiple half-baked programs all doing sort of the same thing in different ways but none of them doing the whole job. Naturally, when someone sees the situation, the first reaction is "All this mess! I'm going to start a NEW project and do it RIGHT this time!"

      If we FOSS users and developers are lucky, eventually there will be a tipping point when a majority gravitate to one project and things get more or less sorted out. If not, well, we can always use ANOTHER, say, media player; some college CS major can tackle it as a senior project, release it, and then forget all about it. If Amarok, Audacious, Beep, BMPx, Banshee, Kaffeine, Miro, Rhythmbox, VLC, Winamp, XMMS, xine and whatever else I'm forgetting don't offer enough choice for you.

      Glad to see that yet another category of software is joining the party.

  21. Re:who cares if it uses mon or not by Gamer_2k4 · · Score: 3, Informative

    And people wonder why Ubuntu hasn't caught on yet...

  22. Re:who cares if it uses mon or not by yuhong · · Score: 4, Informative

    And 10.10 is four months away from release.

  23. Re:who cares if it uses mon or not by sohp · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They don't do PNG? What, are they writing their own image handling codecs from scratch? What kind of half-assed project doesn't build on the existing available libraries to handle low-level things like image formats? Even the first draft release of an image app should be able to just collapse all the format stuff behind an abstraction and get all of them in one swoop. Sure, they might not handle at the application user's level all the odd bits and extensions and tricky stuff (alpha transparency comes to mind, for example) but to just not support it? Sounds like someone needs to review a college first year CS textbook.

  24. gthumb by roalt · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I've been following developments of gthumb lately and I've seem a significant increase in improvements the last year. I'm pretty sure it's triggered by competition with F-Spot and possibly Shotwell. The main reason for me to use gthumb is the superior import facility for your digital photos. You can store them in your own hierarchy/folders in the way you like it.

  25. Wrong criteria by frisket · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Who gives a tinker's spit about "managing" your "photos"? I want to edit images, so I'll install GIMP and set all the filetypes back where they belong. Iff I connect my camera, then perhaps I want to invoke something to offload selected pix and file them by date. F-Spot was about as useful as a wet paper bag at managing photos, with an incomprehensible interface and no editing.

  26. Re:Great, now get rid of XSANE by JohnBailey · · Score: 2, Funny

    XSANE should never be made available. The GUI is a complete mess, looking like something that belongs on the Amiga. Also, it has yet to work with a single scanner or webcam I throw at it.

    I think I see your problem.. Stop throwing stuff. Peripherals tend to last longer without sudden impact.

    --
    It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his job depends on not understanding it.
  27. Re:Great, now get rid of XSANE by blackest_k · · Score: 4, Informative

    10.04 has simplescan nice and clean and easy to use. Does what's needed acquires images and uses libsane.

    5 minutes with shotwell

    Shotwell photo manager is a very simple and generally fast viewer, for some reason rotating a picture to the right is a lot faster than the same operation to the left.

    Theres no keyboard shortcuts for the rotate feature instead its mouse orientated using the right mouse button a lot.

    There is an enhance command but what it does I don't know.
    other tools are available once you select a single photo for editing.
    It's crop tool is pretty good but other adjustments are pretty basic and easy to make pictures appear worse.
    The export to picassa feature is useful too.

    shotwell isn't as good as f-spot but doesnt use mono
    picassa wipes the floor with both of them but isn't native using wine.

    picassa is my preference but shotwell can catch up its also available on windows
     

  28. Re:who cares if it uses mon or not by LingNoi · · Score: 2, Informative

    supporting PNG is failing irrelevant for me. Advanced editing is a job for the GNU Image Manipulation Program.

    It is relevant because the reason they took GIMP out by default in Lucid was because people can edit images in f-spot. Now if they're replacing f-spot as well you can no longer by default edit PNG files and whatever else Shotwell doesn't support. That includes screen shots you take.

  29. Re:who cares if it uses mon or not by jedidiah · · Score: 3, Insightful

    > I would assume the purpose of the application is to handle the user's own photo library, and how many digital cameras store photos in the PNG format?

    Why just limit this to JPEGs? People have a lot of images from a lot of different
    sources. It's foolish just to restrict an image manager just to one class of images
    or a very narrow use case. This is especially true on Linux where you could have
    all sorts of oddball end users all doing their own thing.

    Any "manager" should handle everything and make that management as free of bother
    as possible.

    --
    A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  30. Re:Next on the list... by jedidiah · · Score: 3, Interesting

    > GIMP is awesome, but it dosen't really fit into the "lightweight" niche.

    If you are dragging in the rest of Mono just to have an image editor, it kind of does.

    GIMP could sorely use some sort of "bookmarked UI" so that recently used stuff is
    up front in a manner similar to iPhoto but without it being static. GIMP does some
    stuff better because it's more sophisticated about how it does anything. The UI is
    a bit of a drag though. Finding stuff can be cumbersome.

    It's like searching through 1800 videos to find that show that you were watching
    and didn't finish last night.

    --
    A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  31. Re:who cares if it uses mon or not by Dr.Dubious+DDQ · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If they didn't seem to have such a hatred of KDE, they might consider digikam, which reportedly also has native ports to OSX and Windows now.