Weather | TV Guide | Horoscopes | Competitions

Hotmail
Messenger
Mobile

Picasa for Linux begs a few questions

Send to a friend

APC administrator30 May 2006, 3:57 AM

When Google decided to port the excellent image management software Picasa over to Linux, they opted to use WINE to do so. What isn't clear is why exactly, when there are far better options like GTK out there.

Picasa is a great image management application, supporting most digital formats and offering a huge range of features, both for image archiving and manipulation. If you manage digital photos on a PC, or even a large video library for that matter, you would be hard pressed to find a comparable package without shelling out some moolah. It's powerful, and, above all, easy to use powerfully.

Linux needs an application like this. Google saw this, but rather than porting Picasa as a native Linux application, they have chosen to use WINE, a Linux port of the Win32 architecture.

This begs the question: Why?

A far more intelligent and forward-thinking decision would have been to port the interface to GTK (Gimp Tool Kit) because doing so would unify the interface portion of the program on all platforms. GTK is available for OS X, and there's no Mac version of Picasa yet, so why not kill the proverbial two birds with one bullish application - wrapped in a mixed metaphor? Instead, users have to install Picasa with some bundled WINE components in order to run the program.

WINE is a great piece of software, don't get me wrong. Considering that it runs World of Warcraft (v1.10.x) without a hitch, and is a total rewrite of the Win32 API, it's safe to say that it's an impressive product. However, it is still Windows creeping on to the Linux desktop, even if it's just in the form of "Locate file..." dialogue boxes at the moment.

So what of the newbie user? Perhaps they might find a use for it, especially as the install process has been simplified to the extent that the portion of WINE that is required by the program is compiled into the binary, making it about the closest thing to "1 click install" you can get with Linux. Given these facts, it's fair to assume that the package is partially aimed at potential switchers, as there are no consumer digital cameras (I know of at least) that ship Linux image management software on their install disks, leaving WINE as the only option anyway.

So, there's definitely a market for the software, albeit a small one. However, it still feels disappointing to not be getting the real thing in a Linux port, especially coming from Google. Not that it would be better from another company, but we do expect more from the little San Jose outfit because they have done so much in the way of endorsing and publicly supporting open source.

Come on Google, give us a native version of Picasa. Use GTK for all versions of the program, and, in doing so, show the world that you really support open source software for real, and not just when it makes Redmond look bad.

Comments

RSS feed

Email alert

Carlos Miguel:

I'm not trying to start Flame War III, but why not QT? Google already uses it with Google Earth so I assume they already payed for the developer version of the library, has commercial support, and is cross platform. I won't get into what toolkit is better, I'm not trolling, but my point is that you could have mentioned QT as the other viable option.

29 February 2008, 8:28 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend

Troels Just:

If you're looking for easy portability between Linux, Windows and Mac OS X, Qt is a much better bet than GTK.

29 February 2008, 8:28 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend

Sam:

GTK is not the only option. QT would be just as good or better.

29 February 2008, 8:28 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend

Bill:

2 comments:

1) Digikam is better than Picasa (my take as it has much more functionality)

2) The upgrades to Wine make it much more valuable to the Linux community as more Win products should run and it should make it much cheaper and easier for other vendors to make their products Linux'able. Granted not purely native but it is a big step forward in bringing more apps to linux which should help its growth.

29 February 2008, 8:28 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend

Sys Admin:

GTK? Why not QT? It's cross platform, and Google is already using it for Google Earth.

29 February 2008, 8:28 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend

Joshua Olstad:

you guys are such morons. windoz sucks, and linux is the way of the future. how can you talk about anything linux when you have microsoft all over your website. can you be a little bit more bias?? please get a real os

29 February 2008, 8:28 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend

Dave Cook:

Only the the old gtk1 library runs natively on OS X:

http://gtk-osx.sourceforge.net/

WxWidgets might have been a good choice.

29 February 2008, 8:28 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend

Frank Russo:

Win32 is an API, GTK is an API, and QT is an api. While some are more portable than others, using the win32 API means that google didn't have to do a substancial rewrite of their code. Another positive is that wine will soon be available for Mac X86.

I'd have perfered GTK myself, but know better than to look a gift horse in the mouth.

Sincerely,
Frank Russo

PS, WTF is "Native Linux", is that a distro like Red Hat (sarcasm)

29 February 2008, 8:28 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend

Dezral:

this is stupid...GTK is the oldest fucker ever...
and no thing is easy in that world.... they did make picasa...they bought it.....

29 February 2008, 8:28 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend

Greg:

The reason to go GTK and not QT is licensing issues.
OT is encumbered, this has always been a problem to "purists"

If it is ported to GTK, KDE has an application that makes GTK look like QT andthis be used on the KDE desktops to get a look and feel of QT without picasa having licensing issues with QT.

As a side note, all these childish comments, with no substance and bad language, only make the community look bad.

29 February 2008, 8:28 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend

Bobby:

Wine was used as a quick way to get a Linux version of a native Windows application in a timely mannor without a significant re-write. Its had to blame them for making this initial decision; and hopefully they will use something a little more cross platform for future development.

However, GTK would be a terrible decision. GTK/GTK+ is an antiquated development toolkit that make GUI development as easy at is was in 1995. Generally it takes 2-3 times LONGER to develop software in GTK+ as it does in a modern environment like .Net or Qt. Whats more Qt multi-platform development is significantly easier than even Java is. While GTK+ cross platform development is amazingly difficult at its best (ever wonder why Gnome applications are always 1-2 versions behind on OSX and/or Windows?)

29 February 2008, 8:28 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend

Declan Kennedy:

@1,2,3,5,7,9,11: Wow! You mean there are other cross-platform APIs?

Way to totally miss the point, which was that Google should have chosen a cross-platform API rather than using WINE. Do you get into flame-wars with Red Hat users because you use Gentoo? If the answer is yes, then you may be what's wrong with the Linux community.

@4: Can you colour correct and transform photographs non-destructively with Digikam? Nope. So it's not a Picasa beater, and doesn't even do the basic set of things that the software that comes with a digital camera can do. For that you need The Gimp, and that's a whole world of pain for most users.

Good point about transitioning software, but do you really think that Adobe is going to annnounce the CS line for Linux just because they can now do it with WINE?

@6: "They've got a cave troll" - Borrowmir, The Fellowship of the Ring

@8: So you're saying that Google should get kudos for being lazy? They didn't need to substantially rewrite their code - so what? That argument only makes sense if there is some type of desperate/enterprise need for the software, but it's a lifestyle toy! It's not a RAID driver.

Your next comment doesn't really dignify a response... but you knew that already, didn't you?

@10: Yeah, the politics of Trolltech are definitely one reason to be a little wary of Qt. It's difficult to predict what the licensing situation will be with Qt in the future.

However, I'll repeat this for the visiting delegation of zealots from the K-hole: I couldn't care less what API companies choose to do the job of porting programs to Linux, as long as it isn't WINE. Qt, GTK+, write it in Java and theme it with those fugly Java widgets for all I care, just do it right.

29 February 2008, 8:28 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend

Sam:

@Greg(10)

What do you mean when you say that QT "is encumbered"? Please do not spread FUD. QT is dual licensed. One of the licenses available allows you to create closed source apps, if that is what you want. The other license is the GPL. You can download QT GPL with all the priviledges that that license entails, and there is nothing Trolltech can do if you decide to release your own, modified, version. Of course, your apps will all have to be GPLed, but I wouldn't cal lthat encumbered. I call that fairness.

29 February 2008, 8:28 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend

klhrevolutionist:

He mentioned gtk because it is opensource! And it stands as a gateway between all operating systems!

29 February 2008, 8:28 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend

Ookaze:

@12. "Can you colour correct and transform photographs non-destructively with Digikam?". The answer is YES. Now I have a question : do you and the article author actually use Linux ?
Digikam has a preview for EVERY one of its filters. Digikam can do an amazing lots more than Picasa, like rotate your jpegs without degrading the data, and Digikam is integrated in KDE. Try it next time before talking.

The author says there is "no consumer digital cameras that ship Linux image management software on their install disks". OK yes, except that it's completely irrelevant. Gphoto2 supports all consumer digital cameras and most of professional ones, so there is no problem at all.

So no, Picasa was not needed at all (except if you're anti KDE and don't want to use Digikam), but it is a worthy addition, even though it's not a native app and Digikam is far better.

29 February 2008, 8:28 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend

Declan Kennedy:

@15: Yes, I use Linux full-time, except for playing games, and I am the commenter and the original article author.

"Digikam has a preview for EVERY one of its filters. Digikam can do an amazing lots more than Picasa, like rotate your jpegs without degrading the data, and Digikam is integrated in KDE. Try it next time before talking."

Yep, and so does Picasa. Except that Picasa has implemented ideas like usability and interface design. And if you think that every filter and tool in Picasa has an equivalent in DigiKam, you've just proven that you haven't even tried Picasa. Try it next time before talking.

"The author says there is “no consumer digital cameras that ship Linux image management software on their install disks”. OK yes, except that it’s completely irrelevant. Gphoto2 supports all consumer digital cameras and most of professional ones, so there is no problem at all."

MANAGEMENT software. Not drivers. Linux supports standard USB device drivers - who'da thunk it?

"So no, Picasa was not needed at all (except if you’re anti KDE and don’t want to use Digikam), but it is a worthy addition, even though it’s not a native app and Digikam is far better."

And here we have the clincher - the claim, without providing any irrefutable metric by which to evaluate it, that DigiKam is far better.

Better interface? Nope.
Better filters? Nope.
More features? Nope.
Better Camera support? Nope.

You have a funny definition of better.

29 February 2008, 8:28 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend

dv cool:

F-spot for gnome is excelent even at the low release number but I guess that is another crss platform AIP .net (dont flame me)

29 February 2008, 8:28 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend

Frank Russo:

@12

No, Seriously, I want to know what you think "Native Windows" and "Native Linux" applications are.

Win32 is just an API. If the windows source to an app is available, it can be made to run on almost any "platform" (including sparc/linux and sparc/solaris). You should learn sometimes you should just say thanx (for nothing), and get on with developing/supporting a better product.

At least they didn't use wxGTK /ducks

Frank

29 February 2008, 8:28 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend

Declan Kennedy:

@18:

Considering that in order to run a full WINE install in Linux requires that you:

- emulate a registry
- emulate an MS-DOS filesystem

two things which don't exist in any operating system by default except Windows, I think it's pretty easy to see the difference between WINE and a native API.

For an API to be considered native to a platform, it needs to be developed with the platform in mind. And besides, when I write a Windows application, do I do it with WINE? No, I use the Win32 API, and if it works in WINE... well that's just gravy.

WINE essentially tricks programs into thinking that they are operating within Windows by providing the things (like the registry and DLLs) that the programs expect to find. Do other "cross-platform" APIs need to do this?

I see your point, and perhaps the choice of the word "native" was a poor one, given that most APIs developed "natively" for Linux are actually cross-platform. The fact still remains that, choosing to use an open rewrite of a closed API shows less confidence on Google's part in FOSS than if they were to port the program to another genuinely open API.

29 February 2008, 8:28 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend

Fernando Cassia:

Gee, "great minds think alike" I guess?

I couldn't believe I write my own article yesterday, raising several of the points you make -and other new ones, like why doesn't googl open source picasa-.

Picasa for linux is a good Windows application
-but surely as h*ck is not a linux one
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=32088

FC
PS: notice how one of my screenshots is dated on the 29th. So I had the idea first!. ;-)

29 February 2008, 8:28 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend

Bubbels:

An interesting discussion, I might say.

1) Though my lingering question remains. I don't see why programs can't be ported this way. Is the functionality there in all it's glory? afaik it is. So the program works fine, thus the result is (for a user perspective) a good piece of software on the desktop.
Where lies the problem for the user? I can't think of one.

2) Look at it from the bright side: The Wine team will get an extra boost forward by such endeavours from big companies. Other program developers will benefit, wich makes the leap to Linux smaller and smaller.

29 February 2008, 8:28 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend

Declan Kennedy:

@20: "PS: notice how one of my screenshots is dated on the 29th. So I had the idea first!. ;-)"

Damn you Inquirer! You and your scoops... Although, to be honest I started writing this over last weekend...

Proof? I'll send you the Abiword document :)

29 February 2008, 8:28 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend

CpILL:

I think the Linux community should be thankful for what it gets considering that Google are spending bucks on even a WINE port for what is essentially a tiny portion of the market. A portion that apparently is not even grateful when it does go out of its way to support it.

I hate to say it but 'The Day Of The Linux' will never come now that OS X is on Intel chips. Its as stable (if not more) that most Linux distros (its BSD baby) and it doesn't need the scraps off the application table like Picasa: its got Photoshop "natively". It can do everything Linux can and has as the minimum native application support to compete with Windows, and has always lead the way in the ‘Users Friendly’ department, and now with Intel chips it will be cheap as too (well, eventually). But I digress…

I find it interesting, as a web developer, that things have come full circle and not App developers are facing the same sorts of dilemmas about cross platform issues that the web makers have faced and resolved (or at least know the right way to do things). It might be too late for tired old desktop applications as web-applications seem to be replacing them fairly quickly and for the simple reason that they are cross platform AND they are available potentially from any machine plugged into the web (and soon even the unplugged ones).

Google made a nice gesture 'porting' to WINE an App they didn't make. To redeveloped for GTK or QT etc would cost them money for little gain, merely competing against the GIMP or worse Photoshop. WHY should they? What do they win?

The way I see WINE, is that it is meant to be facilitate stagging from Windows to Linux, so that stuff an office can't live without they can still run until they have a full Linux solution. But as I've already mentioned, I think OS X has already made that scenario improbable in the near future.

29 February 2008, 8:28 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend

mungler:

why? because it was (our survey said...) cheaper.

next!

29 February 2008, 8:28 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend

Tony Brown:

Hi Guys :)
Not much of a techie meself :( Tried that Picasa for awhile and really couldn't get to grips with it and this is after mastering Paint Shop Pro with just a little help from my neighbour :)
I still have "Google Earth " on my PC and use their search engine but as for Picasa :'( was not a happy experience for me.
Cyas later. Tony Brown

29 February 2008, 8:28 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend

Akash Mehta:

Picasa is ok but I use Photoshop anyway (and a legal license too! academic, but still..) so its not very important. I think using WINE was because WINE will, someday, be adopted by the masses, when it is further developed and becomes mature. Making Picasa for WINE would mean that Google would not have to port Picasa to WINE when the better option does in fact become WINE, and I'm sure somebody at a higher level of management within Google recorgnised this.

29 February 2008, 8:28 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend