We want a native Linux Picasa!
João Sousa
Linux Picasa application. We want it, we need it. We don't want to use
MS Windows anymore, or a hacked wine version. Are you listening to us?
AVI
Jonathan Kamens
native vs. WINE. In my experience, the WINE version of Picasa 3.0 is
one of the best applications I've ever used on my Linux box, native or
otherwise.
I want to be able to run the current version of Picasa on my Linux box,
but I frankly don't give a flying fig whether Google delivers that by
doing a native port or just updating their WINE Picasa package to the
current version.
Jonathan Kamens
Janno Pugi
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google-Labs-Picasa-for-Linux" group.
To post to this group, send email to google-labs-pi...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-labs-picasa-f...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-labs-picasa-for-linux?hl=en.
Wade Hampton
I too vote for a native Linux version of Picasa. GTK would be great
as would QT; either native API is better than wine.
However, at this point it would be great to have the latest Picasa 3.6 for
Linux (currently 3.0 beta). As things currently stand, Linux seems to lag
quite far behind Windows and is always missing features....
I regularly use Picasa to quickly cleanup and organize 4-8 GB of
pictures from a single weekend of sports and I move between
Windows and Linux. However, lately I have been using the Windows
version but would really love to keep my workflow all Linux-based....
I have 100+ athletes asking for my pictures after each competition.
Cheers,
--
Wade Hampton
Patrice ARNAL
day-to-day use of Picasa, on an Ubuntu 9.10, the windows version of
Picasa 3.6 runs fairly well under wine.
(And in the "about" popup it appears as Picasa for Linux!)
- Face recognition (Very impressive)
- Move of photos
- Albums
- ...
What does not work, but for me it does not matter,
- Geotagging (I use directly the Exif information and gpsman to do the job)
- Making of a videos
I did not tried the CD burning...
Last but not least, after some problems with other windows
applications under wine that broke Picasa, I use a separate wine
environment for each win app : this is much clean.
2010/1/20 Wade Hampton <wadeha...@gmail.com>:
Patrice ARNAL
This is a joke : this is the result of running Picasa 3.6 under Wine ...
2010/1/21 Patrice ARNAL <patric...@gmail.com>:
Patrick Shanahan
> Here you are !
> This is a joke : this is the result of running Picasa 3.6 under Wine ...
>
> 2010/1/21 Patrice ARNAL <patric...@gmail.com>:
> > I too prefer a native version of Picasa for Linux, but for my
> > day-to-day use of Picasa, on an Ubuntu 9.10, the windows version of
> > Picasa 3.6 runs fairly well under wine.
> > (And in the "about" popup it appears as Picasa for Linux!)
> > - Face recognition (Very impressive)
> > - Move of photos
> > - Albums
> > - ...
> >
> > What does not work, but for me it does not matter,
> > - Geotagging (I use directly the Exif information and gpsman to do the job)
> > - Making of a videos
> >
> > I did not tried the CD burning...
> >
> > Last but not least, after some problems with other windows
> > applications under wine that broke Picasa, I use a separate wine
> > environment for each win app : this is much clean.
> >
Well, I'm somewhat aged and a little retentive, but I don't have any idea
what you are talking about... "Joke" ???
--
Patrick Shanahan Plainfield, Indiana, USA HOG # US1244711
http://wahoo.no-ip.org Photo Album: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/gallery2
Registered Linux User #207535 @ http://counter.li.org
Patrice ARNAL
> * Patrice ARNAL <patric...@gmail.com> [01-21-10 15:39]:
> > Here you are !
> > This is a joke : this is the result of running Picasa 3.6 under Wine ...
> >
> > 2010/1/21 Patrice ARNAL <patric...@gmail.com>:
> > > I too prefer a native version of Picasa for Linux, but for my
> > > day-to-day use of Picasa, on an Ubuntu 9.10, the windows version of
> > > Picasa 3.6 runs fairly well under wine.
> > > (And in the "about" popup it appears as Picasa for Linux!)
> > > - Face recognition (Very impressive)
> > > - Move of photos
> > > - Albums
> > > - ...
> > >
> > > What does not work, but for me it does not matter,
> > > - Geotagging (I use directly the Exif information and gpsman to do the job)
> > > - Making of a videos
> > >
> > > I did not tried the CD burning...
> > >
> > > Last but not least, after some problems with other windows
> > > applications under wine that broke Picasa, I use a separate wine
> > > environment for each win app : this is much clean.
> > >
>
>
> Well, I'm somewhat aged and a little retentive, but I don't have any idea
> what you are talking about... "Joke" ???
>
Well,
it seems that the attached screen capture that proudly exhibited
> "Picasa 3.6.0 (Build 95,2500.0) for Linux"
is missing.
I think that this IS Google's answer to the "Native Linux" question.
Robbie
Running Picasa on several machines - windows versions always work
great, Linux "version" works pretty well on some, hardly at all on
others (and those were machines that ran it great under windows in the
past).
AVI
PICASA', MAYBE GOOGLE WILL FINALLY HEAR TO THIS MOST DISCUSSED TOPIC,
KEEP IT GOING.!
WARNING!: I have tasted on my PC that this hacked Picasa built on 'MS
windows' technology, so it's also supporting win32 viruses, that can
harm your photo worlds... be aware, and it's not running under wine so
the virus will not only harm Picasa, I believe they are free to run
anywhere...I am finding the solution...
On Jan 20, 7:01 pm, João Sousa <jps.so...@gmail.com> wrote:
Philip
WINE is a resource hog - wine apps just don't run well on my laptop,
and god forbid anyone try to use picasa/linux on a netbook... So that
means that it's a pain to use on my ubuntu laptop.
But the larger issue is depending on a port for an application you use
with any regularity. I gave up on picasa after spending far too much
time trying to get it to work on my fedora x86_64 desktop (still
doesn't, no responses to any of the issues posted on that platform
here). I think it is fair to consider the app "unsupported" on
x86_64.
I gave picasa another go after taking google up on the 200M + eye-fi
card deal a month or so ago, but I'm ready to write off the disk space
as a loss & go back to flickr.
The irony here is that it was actually google that taught me that a
web app that works is better than a desktop app that doesn't.
p
On Jan 20, 2:08 pm, Jonathan Kamens <j...@kamens.brookline.ma.us>
wrote:
Jonathan Kamens
x86_64 desktop.
It's Picasa, not WINE, that is the resource hog. A native Linux version of
Picasa would not require significantly less resource than the WINE version
does. The kind of stuff that Picasa does is heavyweight on any platform.
It does a lot of CPU-intensive stuff, uses a lot of memory, and accesses the
disk a lot. None of these would be different in a native port.
jik
David
Saludos
David
davi...@gmail.com
http://www.afotamos.com
Patrick Shanahan
>
> WARNING!: I have tasted on my PC that this hacked Picasa built on 'MS
> windows' technology, so it's also supporting win32 viruses, that can
> harm your photo worlds... be aware, and it's not running under wine so
> the virus will not only harm Picasa, I believe they are free to run
> anywhere...I am finding the solution...
>
You are spreading FUD!
All versions of picasa that run on linux run via wine! There is no
*native* linux version. FACT!
Carl Spitzer
Google should have the good graces to trust us to make it work and
perhaps improve it for them to reuse on the Windows side.
CWSIV
Carl Spitzer
> All versions of picasa that run on linux run via wine! There is no
> *native* linux version. FACT!
It is time there was a Linux version.
CWSIV
dan....@gmail.com
software companies how its done. If we had more support for linux it
would be a more viable option.
On Jan 20, 9:01 am, João Sousa <jps.so...@gmail.com> wrote:
James Laugesen
Pushing Google to release a native picasa client will very likely _not_ improve the "negative" experiences you/we have (broadly I mean, not specifically).
Given that most Picasa+WINE+Linux issues are dependent on the idiosyncrasies of the many linux flavours & installs (ie, not everyone has the same problems, the fedora x86_64 comments earlier for example); a native picasa client would still be susceptible to those kinds of issues, and the Picasa team would still have to deal with them - without the support of CodeWeavers, CrossOver & WINE communities & existing capabilities.
If the developers & architects believe a native client would be overly beneficial (ie performance, release consistency, whatever) they would consider it.
Where-as sticking to WINE releases has been very beneficial for the WINE project and CodeWeavers.
I don't know for a fact, but I imagine that "they" consider the pros of releasing under WINE (thus supporting WINE & CodeWeavers) to outweigh the cons of a non-native version.
There's been a couple of open-source comments; well WINE is open, if you want to "fix" things, get involved with WINE.
Whether we like it or not Windows is still the primary market, and developing WINE benefits the broader community improving the operation of other Windows apps... it's a no-brainer as far as I'm concerned (to support WINE).
Of course, it would be cool to have a native version; but we'd have to be prepared for new problems ;-)
Patrick Shanahan
>
> There's been a couple of open-source comments; well WINE is open, if you
> want to "fix" things, get involved with WINE.
>
> Whether we like it or not Windows is still the primary market, and
> developing WINE benefits the broader community improving the operation of
> other Windows apps... it's a no-brainer as far as I'm concerned (to support
> WINE).
>
Well said, and probably reflects what the future will reveal. And
development of a native version and accompanying problems would only
detract from the overall development of picasa. Present situation is the
best bang for the buck.
And, I would also prefer a native version; reality rules.
AVI
wine and windows files, like other linux programs, that we call
'Native' here....
On Jan 23, 3:18 am, Patrick Shanahan <ptilopt...@gmail.com> wrote:
> * AVI <massage2...@gmail.com> [01-22-10 12:47]:
>
>
>
> > WARNING!: I have tasted on my PC that this hacked Picasa built on 'MS
> > windows' technology, so it's also supporting win32 viruses, that can
> > harm your photo worlds... be aware, and it's not running under wine so
> > the virus will not only harm Picasa, I believe they are free to run
> > anywhere...I am finding the solution...
>
> You are spreading FUD!
>
> All versions of picasa that run on linux run via wine! There is no
> *native* linux version. FACT!
>
> --
> Patrick Shanahan Plainfield, Indiana, USA HOG # US1244711http://wahoo.no-ip.org Photo Album: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/gallery2
Philip
On Jan 23, 10:24 pm, James Laugesen <james.lauge...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello everyone, I haven't been active here in a long time, but I have to
> chime in; I disagree with most comments.
> Pushing Google to release a native picasa client will very likely _not_
> improve the "negative" experiences you/we have (broadly I mean, not
> specifically).
>
> Given that most Picasa+WINE+Linux issues are dependent on the idiosyncrasies
> of the many linux flavours & installs (ie, not everyone has the same
> problems, the fedora x86_64 comments earlier for example); a native picasa
> client would still be susceptible to those kinds of issues, and the Picasa
> team would still have to deal with them - without the support of
> CodeWeavers, CrossOver & WINE communities & existing capabilities.
>
But with the support of those who make all the underlying native
libraries that WINE would no longer be a poorly-fit patch over.
Honestly, I depend on several linux applications daily that are not
part of my standard distribution but are nonetheless packaged for
several distributions by independent teams (or sometimes individuals)
without the resources of google.
> If the developers & architects believe a native client would be overly
> beneficial (ie performance, release consistency, whatever) they would
> consider it.
> Where-as sticking to WINE releases has been very beneficial for the WINE
> project and CodeWeavers.
> I don't know for a fact, but I imagine that "they" consider the pros of
> releasing under WINE (thus supporting WINE & CodeWeavers) to outweigh the
> cons of a non-native version.
>
> There's been a couple of open-source comments; well WINE is open, if you
> want to "fix" things, get involved with WINE.
>
Both of these points assume WINE to be a necessary or central part of
Linux. I disagree.
> Whether we like it or not Windows is still the primary market, and
> developing WINE benefits the broader community improving the operation of
> other Windows apps... it's a no-brainer as far as I'm concerned (to support
> WINE).
>
I don't actually think it benefits the linux community to embrace
secondary citizenship and accept "mostly working" Windows applications
running in emulation. Keep in mind Windows emulation has long been a
moving target - WINE and mono have had a lot of great technical talent
pushing them forward, but are continuously yanked back from full
compatibility with every MS release of the respective products.
"Just focus on the windows version, we'll make due" should give way to
"Ignore our market at your peril". I'm watching the shotwell project
somewhat anxiously.
> Of course, it would be cool to have a native version; but we'd have to be
> prepared for new problems ;-)
I'd look forward to solvable problems.
cheers,
Philip
James Laugesen
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Google-Labs-Picasa-for-Linux" group.
> To post to this group, send email to google-labs-pi...@googlegroups.com
> .
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-labs-picasa-f...@googlegroups.com
> .
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-labs-picasa-for-linux?hl=en
> .
>
Hi Phillip, you make good points, but sorry WINE is not an emmulator
(pun intended), nor is mono, and to suggest they are failing projects
is FUD.
The fact is, google targetted windows, and then WINE _enabled_ google
to deliver picasa to Linux users with minimal work.
Picasa already existed, and wine already existed, why spend resources
developing a native picasa (which then requires ongoing management),
when the same resources could be spent developing (the already
existing) WINE, to allow the delivery of (the already existing) picasa.
All-the-while having only a single picasa development stream to manage
(and license), and WINE contributions injected into the open-source
community.
Of course it would've been better if picasa was developed with cross-
platform support in mind from the begining, but it wasn't.
In this case we _are_ second class citizens.
Anyway sort of diverging a bit now... My original point is just that
the people asking for this should not expect a native picasa to
magically resolve issues (generally, not specifically) that you've
been having. A native version will sill have headaches ;-)
Philip
> > For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/google-labs-picasa-for-linux?hl=en
> > .
>
> Hi Phillip, you make good points, but sorry WINE is not an emmulator
> (pun intended), nor is mono, and to suggest they are failing projects
> is FUD.
>
Actually, Wine is now an emulator (note the acronym still works,
though they've ditched it):
http://wiki.winehq.org/FAQ#head-c9e6502ad636315e905d07f7e44594757a6738e3
I didn't say either project was failing, only that they can't really
have *complete* success - Windows will always be more Windows-like
than either :-)
> The fact is, google targetted windows, and then WINE _enabled_ google
> to deliver picasa to Linux users with minimal work.
>
I would also add "...and minimal success". I don't know any happy
picasa/linux users, though it is quite successful on Windows. I think
this creates a vicious cycle - few people use picasa/linux because it
is poor quality, but why create a native port for such a small user
community?
> Picasa already existed, and wine already existed, why spend resources
> developing a native picasa (which then requires ongoing management),
> when the same resources could be spent developing (the already
> existing) WINE, to allow the delivery of (the already existing) picasa.
> All-the-while having only a single picasa development stream to manage
> (and license), and WINE contributions injected into the open-source
> community.
>
There are actually a lot of good reasons to create native ports of
applications. And not one actually successful wine-based linux desktop
app that I can think of. Or, for that matter, Windows app that
requires linux emulation...
Really, wine has its place. It was a godsend to be able to run MS
Office on my linux box... until OpenOffice. Don't know any serious
linux users who use MS Office as their primary office suite since.
> Of course it would've been better if picasa was developed with cross-
> platform support in mind from the begining, but it wasn't.
> In this case we _are_ second class citizens.
>
_if we choose to be_
though, I completely agree with you that's how google sees it. If I
saw it that way, I'd just get a mac and write off this whole "open
source OS" experiment (no, an OSS kernel doesnt qualify mac as such).
Google is a brilliant company, which is the only reason I didn't see
that this app was wine-based and think "Ah, second-class treatment.
Fail. Next option?"
Of course, that's what I've done now. Another plug: shotwell
http://yorba.org/shotwell/
> Anyway sort of diverging a bit now... My original point is just that
> the people asking for this should not expect a native picasa to
> magically resolve issues (generally, not specifically) that you've
> been having. A native version will sill have headaches ;-)
It will, and it may still lag far behind it's popular-OS siblings (see
skype). But it will be usable and supported (see skype).
thanks,
Philip
Gino
It is completely necessary to have a native Picasa for
Linux................. preffer GTK... ;)
Also Google Earth....
Please, oh please.....
Jonathan Kamens
> I would also add "...and minimal success". I don't know any happy
> picasa/linux users,
I've said over and over again that I'm a "happy picasa/linux user." I
don't know how I can be any more explicit than that. I am extremely
impressed that Google took the time to enhance and improve WINE to make
Picasa run successfully on it. I am grateful for the work, and I
believe that the result runs quite well.
> though it is quite successful on Windows. I think
> this creates a vicious cycle - few people use picasa/linux because it
> is poor quality, but why create a native port for such a small user
> community?
>
I think few people use it because Google hasn't done a good job of
packaging it, not because the application itself is unstable or performs
badly.
Not to mention the fact that a release of Picasa 3.0 which was first
released almost a year ago to beta testers, was, for some unfathomable
reason, never released to the public. The Linux version of picasa 3.0
in Google's "testing" repository is several months older (and buggier)
than the last one they released to beta testers. Technically, I'm not
supposed to tell you that -- beta testers who are given access to the
newer versions aren't supposed to talk about them in public. I suppose
we'll see if they still care enough about Linux Picasa to kick me out of
the beta program because of what I just said ;-).
And then there's the fact that they didn't bother to release Picasa 3.5
or 3.6 for Linux.
Adoption and usage would be significantly higher if they did something
about these. Unfortunately, it seems that they don't think there's
enough ROI to invest the time it would take to do these, let alone the
much larger chunk of time to rewrite Picasa as a native app, which is
why I think the constant clamoring here for a native version is just
silly. Here's a clue: Google exists to make money. They will develop a
native Linux version of Picasa if they'll make money from doing so.
Given how successful Google is, it seems that they're pretty good at
figuring out what's going to make them money and what isn't.
> Of course, that's what I've done now. Another plug: shotwell
> http://yorba.org/shotwell/
>
Thats for the pointer. I'll check out shotwell if/when I decide that
Picasa on WINE is as bad as people here seem to think it is ;-).
jik
AVI
and Picasa 3, except some features (movie making etc.) everything is
working :)
> Of course, that's what I've done now. Another plug: shotwellhttp://yorba.org/shotwell/
AVI
it :)
mhenriday
wrote:
I agree with Jonathan here. I, too, am a (relatively) happy Picasa for
Linux (or perhaps, it would be more accurate to say, Picasa *on*
Linux) user. What I miss are the excellent Google developers, Lei
Zhang, who were not only active participants in this forum, but who
gave us Linux users access to Picasa versions that worked well, albeit
via Wine. I can understand that these skilful developers were called
to other, more pressing duties when the Chrome browser was in the
process of being developed (a great success !), but I hope that now
Google will realise that Linux users do, in fact, constitute a vital
element in user mix that avails themselves of Google product and allow
these developers to return to Picasa for Linux !...
Henri
João Sousa
Although the wine version works (and I'm sure we're thankfully that
Google provided it), even the newer 3.6 with the hacked install, there
are some artifacts, bad font rendering and bad system integration,
virtual wine drives mapping, etc. Hey, don't get me wrong, it works!
But it could be much better, user friendly and painless install/
integration with the system. Just like everybody wants Google Chrome
native linux and not running it under wine.
And GTK based applications generally work well under all linux distros
and desktop environments, if the required GTK libs are installed, at
least that's my experience. So it's a natural choice. Google Chrome
works well with GTK. So could Picasa, I guess.
On Jan 20, 7:08 pm, Jonathan Kamens <j...@kamens.brookline.ma.us>
wrote:
> As I've said before, I really don't understand what the fuss is about
> native vs. WINE. In my experience, the WINE version of Picasa 3.0 is
> one of the best applications I've ever used on my Linux box, native or
> otherwise.
>
> Jonathan Kamens
Heimen Stoffels
version.
@Jonathan: How can I join the beta tester program?
Philip
Henri) have access to software I don't... so maybe we're not on equal
ground. You guys are happy, I've moved on.
A final note - there is an interesting discussion of Wine (even the
CodeWeavers COO weighs in) in the latest eWeek article here:
http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Linux-and-Open-Source/Wine-Is-a-Long-Shot-at-Solving-the-WindowsAppsonLinux-Problem-703713/
All our points are echoed.