- Related Stories
-
Google deal highlights Web 2.0 boom
March 13, 2006 -
Google--what you get for $400 a share
November 28, 2005
Google has just released a Linux version of Picasa, its free to download photo software, via Google Labs. Picasa offers basic editing, sharing, organizing and publishing of photos. Google acquired the photo management company in 2004.
Google has made three different package managers for Linux download: Red Hat/Fedora/Suse/Mandriva x86; Debian/Ubuntu x86; and a self-extracting installer for any x86 Linux distribution. Google says that testing has confirmed Picasa will support Debian Sarge and Etch, Fedora Core 4 and 5, Linspire 5, Mandriva 2006 and 2005, Red Hat Workstation 3 and Workstation, Ubuntu 5.10 (Breezy Badger), and SuSE 9.3 and 10.0.
See more CNET content tagged:
Google Picasa,
Google Inc.,
Linux,
photograph
Well, now all of you can join the waiting club. The chances are the Linux version will get the same lame update schedule. Hell, they can't even manage to keep up with RAW file support let alone fixing the major short comings in the program.
Time to find something else. Google can play their lame games. I am tired of waiting.
R
Anyway...perhaps this Linux version has something to do with a Google OS (LINUX) that will be coming down the pipe down the road. They might aswell get some experience with the language.
Why do MAC people cry everytime something is released that doesn't have a MAC version? YOU choose the OS that you have, live with it.
Also, Picasa doesn't cost anything and you're moaning that they haven't released a new major update for Windows! Isn't that just being a bit petty? You should also note that some Linux users are already complaining that a) Picasa isn't open source and b) it's got some Windows-like quirks in the Linux version, so even all the Linux users aren't happy either!
You've also made the assumption that supporting two platforms will significantly slow down the release of future versions. This is probably why Google took the WINE route - now that the initial WINE-based Linux version is out, future code changes simply need to be tested against WINE in Linux and only written to the API that WINE supports. Yes, the testing phase will be slightly longer, but it shouldn't mean writing two sets of code.
I've tried out Picasa in Linux and it's a fairly slick piece of software and a pretty good (not quite perfect) port to Linux - you're stating that Linux users don't deserve this and Mac users (who can already use Photoshop Elements and no doubt many other photo-handling suites) do? Isn't that being somewhat arbitrary and, to be frank, quite pig-headed? I suppose you're going to complain if they release Google Desktop or Google Earth for Linux next?
Also, Picasa doesn't cost anything and you're moaning that they haven't released a new major update for Windows! Isn't that just being a bit petty? You should also note that some Linux users are already complaining that a) Picasa isn't open source and b) it's got some Windows-like quirks in the Linux version, so even all the Linux users aren't happy either!
You've also made the assumption that supporting two platforms will significantly slow down the release of future versions. This is probably why Google took the WINE route - now that the initial WINE-based Linux version is out, future code changes simply need to be tested against WINE in Linux and only written to the API that WINE supports. Yes, the testing phase will be slightly longer, but it shouldn't mean writing two sets of code.
I've tried out Picasa in Linux and it's a fairly slick piece of software and a pretty good (not quite perfect) port to Linux - you're stating that Linux users don't deserve this and Mac users (who can already use Photoshop Elements and no doubt many other photo-handling suites) do? Isn't that being somewhat arbitrary and, to be frank, quite pig-headed? I suppose you're going to complain if they release Google Desktop or Google Earth for Linux next?
support Linux is a mistake. It is arbitrary and capricious. The
tiny non-server Linux population that will use the new Linux
Picasa is not the demographic interested in web photo albums.
They're mainly programmers. So, Google will now spend a lot
of time maintaining a little used port of Picasa.
On the other hand, Mac users, a growing group, do use web
photo albums. So, it would have made better sense to port to
OS X.
Until a few years ago Picasa was retail software. I would get free
copies whenever I bought a new digital camera, and, preferring
to use Mac for photo handling, pass it on to Windows users.
because it's a small user group is a specious
one. There are still more desktop (non-server)
Linux users than Mac users by any recent analyst
reckoning. Assertions to the contrary are
wishful thinking.
The reason Google probably did it was first and
foremost completeness (i.e., supporting
everyone), but just as importantly: Google is
mostly a Linux company. Their entire
infrastructure runs on it, the stuff they sell
(such as their search appliances) are all
Linux-based, and nearly all their software
development is Linux-centric. They do Linux --
it's what they know, its what they have
resources for, it's what they do. The only
reason they release apps for Windows is that it
still has the largest desktop user base
(eroding, to be sure, but it'll be a
long time before they are insignificant).
No, the real reason that Picasa for Linux is a
mistake is because it's got too much
competition. There are already a half-dozen
similar apps with more functionality and better
desktop integration than Picasa. Lets face it,
when they released the Windows version, an
open-source knock-off popped up a few weeks
later. Now that Google's late to the table,
their product is no better than the Windows
version. If they are going to make software
function like it does in Windows, it's already
destined to be uncompetitive. Linux and Linux
desktop applications are maturing at a far
faster rate than Microsoft and Apple.
Therein lies the crux of the issue. Not that
they are wasting time on Linux development
(which is where they make their money), but
rather they are releasing software that may be
innovative for one platform, but completely
dated on another. They need to treat the
plodding-along Windows environment much
differently than the more dynamic Linux
environment. Failing to do so makes their
efforts second rate.
I'd point out that Picasa uses winelib, a port
of the Win32 API, to run on Linux. It means
several things: first, it's not a "port" of the
application, just a recompilation of the same
exact code and linked Linux; second, it means
that development time wasn't wasted "porting"
the application to Linux, since compling with
WINE is very straight-forward; and lastly it
means that there wasn't a reason that it
couldn't have been released concurrent with the
Windows version. Google did make some patches to
WINE, but none of the issues they addressed
specifically prevented the app from working
(merely things to boost performance, make some
things behave less overwhelmingly Windows-like).