×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

900 comments

Where does this leave GIMP? (5, Insightful)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#30155784)

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.

Re:Where does this leave GIMP? (5, Funny)

lisaparratt (752068) | more than 4 years ago | (#30155828)

Chained up in the basement.

Re:Where does this leave GIMP? (3, Interesting)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | more than 4 years ago | (#30155946)

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.

Re:Where does this leave GIMP? (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30156076)

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.

Re:Where does this leave GIMP? (1, Insightful)

rhyre417 (919946) | more than 4 years ago | (#30156236)

And we are supposed to believe you because of your anonymity?

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.  Unfortunately, on slashdot, the second statement is usually
(sometimes unfairly) tagged as the extraordinary one.

Re:Where does this leave GIMP? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30156178)

I totally agree, but they aren't arguing that they want to erase gimp from the history books, or even that they want to remove it from Ubuntu. They're simply saying it's come beyond the point of "basic desktop application" and shouldn't be installed by default anymore.

If it bothers you that much, sudo apt-get install gimp once you've finished your install and voila it's back!

Re:Where does this leave GIMP? (4, Insightful)

S-4'N3 (1232394) | more than 4 years ago | (#30156268)

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.

Re:Where does this leave GIMP? (2, Insightful)

Hikeeba! (117395) | more than 4 years ago | (#30156320)

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...

Re:Where does this leave GIMP? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30156324)

Miguel DeIcaza chose GTK as the cornerstone on which he would begin the GNOME UI

No. No he didn't. He didn't have anything to do with that decision.

Re:Where does this leave GIMP? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30156194)

Well wake him up

Re:Where does this leave GIMP? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30155884)

It seems like it would be a better fit to look at including GIMP with the Photoshop Layout plugin so that it is less of the independent, multi-window, limited intuitiveness craziness that seems to have stuck with GIMP since '96 than to simply remove it.

Re:Where does this leave GIMP? (4, Insightful)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 4 years ago | (#30155898)

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.

If GIMP is in universe (3, Interesting)

tepples (727027) | more than 4 years ago | (#30155966)

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.

Re:If GIMP is in universe (1)

edmicman (830206) | more than 4 years ago | (#30156242)

I've found that most things in apt lag behind in updates. A bulk of the software I use day-to-day is multiple point versions behind the latest release; I've had to muck around with PPAs and getdeb and crap to finagle the same versions on Ubuntu as I use on Windows.

Don't forget Paint.NET (4, Informative)

Nerdposeur (910128) | more than 4 years ago | (#30156050)

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.

Re:Don't forget Paint.NET (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30156126)

Fail, it doesn't appear to be available for ubuntu!

"Paint.NET is free image and photo editing software for computers that run Windows." http://www.getpaint.net/index.html [getpaint.net]

Plus it's written in shitty .NET, so it will probably never be available for Ubuntu and it's going to be slow and horrible to use.

Plus plus the gimp's better anyways!

Re:Don't forget Paint.NET (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30156282)

He noted that it's for Windows.

And there has been some success in getting Paint.NET to run on Linux: http://code.google.com/p/paint-mono/ [google.com]
It may be unofficial, but it's a start and defeats your "probably never be available for Ubuntu" comment. Paint.NET is really quite nice.

Re:Don't forget Paint.NET (1, Informative)

MrHanky (141717) | more than 4 years ago | (#30156196)

Paint.mono [google.com] is the Linux port of that program. It exists, and it works, but it's miles away from the power of the Gimp. It's paint, not a photo editing application.

Re:Where does this leave GIMP? (1)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 4 years ago | (#30156060)

So Paint Shop Prop has a proper Red-eye-removal tool?

Picasa doesn't. F-spot doesnt. iPhoto doesn't.

This still doesn't address why Paint Shop Pro is particularly suitable for anyone.

It's just more random nonsense FUD that gets repeated by people with no actual clue.

Too bad, really (4, Insightful)

KingSkippus (799657) | more than 4 years ago | (#30156230)

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 [getpaint.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.

Only removed from default install (5, Informative)

Albanach (527650) | more than 4 years ago | (#30155806)

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.

Re:Only removed from default install (4, Insightful)

JDeane (1402533) | more than 4 years ago | (#30155924)

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.

Download size (1, Flamebait)

tepples (727027) | more than 4 years ago | (#30156030)

It's still a click away in the package manager.

One click and five hours of waiting for people stuck in a country that doesn't recognize a "right to broadband". And is GIMP still in main (stuff for which Canonical sells support), or has it been moved to universe (free software ported to Ubuntu for which Canonical does not sell support)?

Re:Download size (2, Informative)

vondo (303621) | more than 4 years ago | (#30156176)

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.

Re:Download size (4, Informative)

PixelSlut (620954) | more than 4 years ago | (#30156188)

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.

Re:Download size (2, Interesting)

tepples (727027) | more than 4 years ago | (#30156280)

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.

sudo apt-get install gimp (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30156142)

Problem solved.

Re:Only removed from default install (3, Insightful)

Rob the Bold (788862) | more than 4 years ago | (#30156202)

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.

Re:Only removed from default install (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30156254)

Exactly.

Now if they would just remove OpenOffice, games, and other shit like that then we might have something.

I have never understood why Linux distros think major applications should be part of the base install. It makes no sense. It makes the base install huge and it makes more work to maintain all that crap for each release. That's work that should be put towards making the true base install very stable, feature-filled and up-to-date. Instead they futz around getting applications working that have nothing to do with the basic OS.

I'm all for having application in the repository, apt-get install <whatever> is very good, but don't make things like GIMP part of the base operating system.

Re:Only removed from default install (1)

Abcd1234 (188840) | more than 4 years ago | (#30156356)

I have never understood why Linux distros think major applications should be part of the base install. It makes no sense.

This is actually my biggest gripe with Ubuntu. Back in the day when bandwidth was more precious and floppy disks were a pain, the installer would ask you, at minimum, that category of applications you wanted to install. Why on earth doesn't Ubuntu offer similar functionality? What if I *don't* want OO.o installed?

Worse, because of the ubuntu-desktop meta-package, I can't even remove it (well, I can, but I have to create dummy OO.o packages to satisfy ubuntu-desktop's dependencies) without risking breaking upgrades. Such a pain in the ass...

Synaptic - download Gimp (0, Redundant)

captainpanic (1173915) | more than 4 years ago | (#30155834)

Not really a problem, right?

People who like to play with graphics already know the Gimp... Just click and install.

Fark.com photoshop contests? (1, Funny)

Icegryphon (715550) | more than 4 years ago | (#30155852)

Everyone photoshops now a days.
I have seen many shops in my time
I can tell by the pixels.

Re:Fark.com photoshop contests? (3, Funny)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#30155922)

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.

Eh. (3, Informative)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 4 years ago | (#30155862)

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.

Yep (2, Insightful)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 4 years ago | (#30155866)

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.

Re:Yep (3, Informative)

lbbros (900904) | more than 4 years ago | (#30155912)

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.

Re:Yep (1)

Rary (566291) | more than 4 years ago | (#30156000)

It's not being removed from the CD, it's just not being installed by default. Which makes sense. Most people don't need it.

I'm a developer, and I do UI stuff, so I use GIMP. But most folks just want to be able to crop their photos and clean up the red eye. There are plenty of much simpler tools that can do that.

By the way, I wasn't aware of the new UI in GIMP 2.8. I can't wait to see it. I love GIMP, but can't stand the stupid UI that it currently used (I hated that UI design when the old pre-.NET Visual BASIC used it, and I hate it now in GIMP).

Re:Yep (4, Insightful)

Darundal (891860) | more than 4 years ago | (#30156020)

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)?

Re:Yep (3, Informative)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 4 years ago | (#30156244)

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.

Re:Yep (2, Interesting)

nomadic (141991) | more than 4 years ago | (#30156024)

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...

Re:Yep (3, Funny)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 4 years ago | (#30156042)

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?

Re:Yep (2, Insightful)

Rockoon (1252108) | more than 4 years ago | (#30156208)

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

Re:Yep (3, Insightful)

scorp1us (235526) | more than 4 years ago | (#30156378)

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.

Re:Yep (2, Insightful)

SaDan (81097) | more than 4 years ago | (#30156004)

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.

Re:Yep (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30156014)

That UI is perfect for my dual monitor pc. If you don't like the UI, don't use it and buy photoshop (or paint shop pro, which is a much better deal).

Re:Yep (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30156240)

Photoshop does just fine on any monitor setup. Why force Gimp to be inferior in features?

Re:Yep (1)

zardozo (1611009) | more than 4 years ago | (#30156080)

But once you learn it you can then look cool to passers by. And impress you girlfriend with your editing skil. :)

Re:Yep (1)

Rockoon (1252108) | more than 4 years ago | (#30156108)

This.

GIMP is clearly designed by developers for themselves, instead of by developers for users. Its all rather sad because GIMP, feature-wise, is pretty much on-par in most ways with Photoshop.

I've tried several times to use GIMP for my photo editing needs, but every time I run away precisely because the UI is so bad. Can't find the feature, or its implemented unintuitively, or I need to do 3 operations to do something common that in Photoshop only takes 1 operation.

Re:Yep (3, Insightful)

Panzor (1372841) | more than 4 years ago | (#30156110)

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.

Re:Yep (1)

Teun (17872) | more than 4 years ago | (#30156128)

Once you start using it it's just like with any new application a matter of time and experience for it to become familiar.

But then I never experienced Photoshop long enough to see it as a standard.

Anyhow, for those like me that need it it's just a quick download away.

Re:Yep (2, Insightful)

dsavi (1540343) | more than 4 years ago | (#30156152)

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.

Re:Yep (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30156228)

The users you saw must have been photoshopped.

Re:Yep (2, Insightful)

MrHanky (141717) | more than 4 years ago | (#30156342)

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.

name change (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30155896)

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

Re:name change (5, Funny)

thePowerOfGrayskull (905905) | more than 4 years ago | (#30155956)

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

Re:name change (2, Funny)

muckracer (1204794) | more than 4 years ago | (#30156022)

>> 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! :-)

Re:name change (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30156294)

>> 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! :-)

Your ingenuity of using angle brackets instead of quote tags intrigues me. You must have lots of good ideas.

Re:name change (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30156162)

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

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

Re:name change (1)

Panzor (1372841) | more than 4 years ago | (#30156270)

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

i dont mean to troll, but once the name changes

...the general, untrained populus will get the two identical apps confused as being different, repositories will have their keyword for "gimp" changed, thus forcing regular users to dig up what the name change was (annoying to do, especially if a script handles fresh installs), etc, etc.

So many people used the javax.swing library before it was officially released that they chose not to change the "javax" to "java" because of the pressure from developers not wanting all of their GUI programs to fail at the next java update.

To play my own devil's advocate, Pidgin did this nicely, though they were forced into the situation and got a decent amount of online press for it, which informed the public of the name change.

The name says what it does (2, Informative)

tepples (727027) | more than 4 years ago | (#30156136)

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".

I don't think that word means what you think... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30156332)

So we should therefore encourage Apple Software Solutions, the Canadian Conservative–Reform Alliance Party, Sun Hardware Interface Technologies... ? Somehow I think you just fell down a slippery slope of stupid.

Do consider the other meanings [wikipedia.org], including a fairly offensive pejorative for someone with a disability. Although if you subscribe to the "Engineers would call 'Kentucky Fried Chicken' 'Warm Dead Bird'" school of thinking, I suppose it's not that absurd.

Re:The name says what it does (1)

boristhespider (1678416) | more than 4 years ago | (#30156376)

Fucking hell, are you that daft? No-one can pick anything dubious out of MIE without really, really trying hard, whereas everyone knows what a gimp is. The name is fucking horrible and I'd be very surprised if the full name came first and the abbreviation second rather than the other way around.

"LOL you know what would be really funny? Calling the program GIMP because then we can claim it's from Gnu Image ManiPulator! HehhehicSNORT."

It's a horrible name and should be changed if they want it to actually grow any further -- and I say this using it daily.

Re:name change (1)

PixelSlut (620954) | more than 4 years ago | (#30156264)

What would be the upside of changing the name? It's still going to be the same software, it's going to do at least as much as it does now... but you think it's somehow going to be better because it has a different name?? Should GNOME change its name to something a little less garden-variety, or a little less dungeons and dragonsy? KDE doesn't even really mean anything (at least the K doesn't), so should it change its name so it makes more sense to you?

I have no issue with this (5, Interesting)

C_Kode (102755) | more than 4 years ago | (#30155908)

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.

Re:I have no issue with this (4, Insightful)

mrjb (547783) | more than 4 years ago | (#30156040)

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.

Re:I have no issue with this (2, Insightful)

C_Kode (102755) | more than 4 years ago | (#30156362)

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?

Re:I have no issue with this (2, Insightful)

SaDan (81097) | more than 4 years ago | (#30156112)

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.

Re:I have no issue with this (1)

Jay Maynard (54798) | more than 4 years ago | (#30156134)

Amen. Every time I've tried using the GIMP, I gave up in total frustration. I worked at it for a while when I needed a graphics editing program on my OS X laptop, and finally deleted it in disgust and bought Pixelmator.

Nonsense (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30155916)

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

Oh, wait......

What's next? (-1, Flamebait)

nycguy (892403) | more than 4 years ago | (#30155958)

The Ubuntu Foundation announces, "We feel the keyboard is too complex and powerful for most users, so the next version of Ubuntu will support only a mouse by default." Meanwhile, in a boardroom at Infinite Loop, Steve Jobs asks, "Why didn't I think of that?" iPhone users everywhere say, "You already did, Steve. Welcome to our world, Linux users."

Re:What's next? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30156150)

And then Canonical will start selling laptops pre-loaded with Ubuntu that have no keyboard, just a single giant button.

http://www.theonion.com/content/video/apple_introduces_revolutionary

My Linux Noobs love it (2, Insightful)

kcfoxie (1504385) | more than 4 years ago | (#30155990)

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.

GIMP text tool incompatible with photoshop (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30155998)

when you create text in the photoshop text tool it imports as curves in the GIMP.

when you create text in the GIMP text tool it imports as curves in photoshop.

so it's utterly, utterly useless if you exchange psd files with the outside world.

What is F Spot? (2, Interesting)

Sporkinum (655143) | more than 4 years ago | (#30156068)

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

Re:What is F Spot? (2, Informative)

drumbug1 (1140947) | more than 4 years ago | (#30156190)

Your google is broken, eh?

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

Re:What is F Spot? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30156256)

It's alphabetical -- Right next to G Spot.

PFref (5, Funny)

muckracer (1204794) | more than 4 years ago | (#30156102)

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?

Yay. (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30156116)

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.

Good (1, Informative)

ledow (319597) | more than 4 years ago | (#30156158)

I may be just me but as a casual user, I'm glad someone else realises this.

I use Irfanview for conversion, resizing, cropping and other basics (yes, even on Linux - sorry but it runs perfect on WINE and does 90% of what I need to do to get photos from digital media or my scanner, get them ready for going across the internet, onto various accounts, to relatives, etc. in a decent time). I use Paint Shop Pro, or the virtually identical but cheaper ancient-version-of-Serif-Photoplus that I still have, for anything more "fancy". With those I've done everything from creating panaromic photo images to creating individual bits of clipart, to doing curves, borders and backgrounds for websites and all sorts.

But GIMP? Hell, I don't even know where to start whenever I load it. I've installed it dozens of times thinking I must be missing something that makes it easier to use but it's just not worth my time. The photoshop-modifications made it a million times simpler in a matter of seconds, why they aren't the default I can't fathom.

Simple fact is, I specify software for schools. If they demand a free bit of software, we use Irfanview for scanning, conversion, cropping etc. and maybe Artweaver for anything that needs to be created. GIMP has never got past the "WTF is that" stage of its initial screens.

ImageMagick (1)

NtwoO (517588) | more than 4 years ago | (#30156168)

in combination with simple bash for loops can handle most of the image processing joe user needs.

The age of digital photography does see plenty of people composing their own images. These folk, however, will google around and emerge *oops* apt-get install gimp.

Re:ImageMagick (1)

Alphager (957739) | more than 4 years ago | (#30156352)

in combination with simple bash for loops can handle most of the image processing joe user needs.

The age of digital photography does see plenty of people composing their own images. These folk, however, will google around and emerge *oops* apt-get install gimp.

Joe user does not what a "bash" is.

G... dropped (1, Funny)

Teun (17872) | more than 4 years ago | (#30156206)

Hmm, as an avid KDE user I (logically) first misread the article's head as Gnome dropped.
Now that would improve the user experience. ;)

Wow. Just wow. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30156248)

I guess I can stop complaining that fedora 12 does not include pidgin, in favour of some idiot client with no file transfer and no encryption.

This spells bad news for the GIMP project. (1)

dsavi (1540343) | more than 4 years ago | (#30156260)

I have kind of seen this coming. We all know that the current (Stable) UI is bad, not just the multiple windows part of it. I haven't seen an update to the GIMP, stable or unstable, for more than three months now. There doesn't seem to be the active community around GIMP that I was at least under the impression existed before. Learn from Blender, GIMP devs: Don't leave your site purely informational, listen to the community about the UI, build a community and promote it on your site and you are sure to stay in more distributions and attract more developers.

It all depends on what you're accustomed to. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30156272)

I feel as confused in Photoshop as many Slashdot commenters seem to be in GIMP. This is likely because I learned to do image editing / design tasks on GIMP, not on Photoshop. Even the last round of GIMP UI changes, which many applauded, left me more confused than I used to be when using GIMP. The thought that GIMP is adopting a "single window mode" really depresses me. :-(

This is the first thing to get dropped?! (1)

attah (1217454) | more than 4 years ago | (#30156274)

Drop that bloated OpenOffice before considering dumping programs that actually do what they are supposed to.. Abiword is quite enough for the average user, that probably almost never starts presenter or that lousy excel-wannabe thingy. Now how's that for a stripdown of crap ey?

they're right to do it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30156288)

I'm not trolling. It's probably true that most ubuntu users are incapable of using the GIMP, or any application more complex than a simple (probably unresizable) window with just a File menu and File->Quit option.

GIMP is a great application, but not for gknobs.

As such, in a distro designed for gnobs, it is unsurprising to see it go the same way as most other essential linux tools (eg konqueror and other assorted kde 3.x apps).

They've got this one backwards. (3, Informative)

ProppaT (557551) | more than 4 years ago | (#30156372)

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...

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...