Ubuntu Replaces F-Spot With Shotwell 361
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."
um who cares? (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.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
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
On the other hand... (Score:5, Insightful)
For fuck sake, editors.
EDIT!
Re: (Score:2)
Re:On the other hand... (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.
Re: (Score:2)
It was just an egregious example of dense error mismanagement.
That and I was feeling grumpy. I haven't had my geritol yet today. :P
Re:On the other hand... (Score:5, Funny)
Pah. People with four or less numbers in their UID are just a myth.
Re:On the other hand... (Score:5, Funny)
really?
Re: (Score:2)
What is certain is holders of 4 digit UIDs with a Sensayoomah(TM) are a myth.
--
BMO
Re:On the other hand... (Score:5, Funny)
I've heard of these 4-digiters, but never seen one myself...
Re:On the other hand... (Score:5, Funny)
Ah, the irony of Slashdot UID's - it's the only dick measuring contest where the winner is the smallest one...
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Yes.
Re:On the other hand... (Score:4, Funny)
According to your mom I'm more of a legend...
Re: (Score:2)
Ain't that the truth.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
It's not impossible, it just always results in this: http://xkcd.com/716/ [xkcd.com]
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
>For fuck sake, editors.
"Trolling is a art" - Anonymous
--
BMO
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Sure, I guess that works until you can install Emacs, but I'd hardly call it a real editor....
If someone integrates F-spot into gnome..... (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?
Re: (Score:3, 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 [headbands.com]
Re:If someone integrates F-spot into gnome..... (Score:5, Funny)
Stupid remarks (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.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Stupid remarks (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.
Re: (Score:2)
It's a hell of a lot more relevant than yours - at least it expresses an actual experience with the software.
-Peter
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah yeah, on Kubuntu, it is called K-Spot.
By extension then, in Gnome, shouldn't it be called the G-spot???
I don't believe it exists.
Isn't it all about options? (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?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Isn't it all about options? (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.
Re:Isn't it all about options? (Score:5, 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
Re: (Score:2)
Woooow. Understatement of the century.
You know come to think of it, I don't htink I've ever met a single person that uses mc, everyone either uses real GUIs, or real CLI tools...
Also, Icaza is a certifiable jackass. He wasn't so bad in the beginning, but his trollish behaviour concerning the entire mono situation is just too much.
Re: (Score:3, 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.
Re:Isn't it all about options? (Score:4, 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).
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The real issue is with patents. Stallman wrote about this last year.
http://www.fsf.org/news/dont-depend-on-mono [fsf.org]
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.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
Re:Isn't it all about options? (Score:5, 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.
Re: (Score:2)
While I haven't used C#, from what I've heard it's vastly superior to Java; so I understand if you like it. .Net. For instance, the VM uses a GC designed for C, and apparently the library is not written especially carefully.
However, still from what I've heard, mono is a very poor implementation of
Re:Isn't it all about options? (Score:5, Informative)
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.
Re: (Score:3, 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.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, 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.
Curing Mono (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm always glad to hear about mono being used less on Linux.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Curing Mono (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.
Re:Curing Mono (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 [gnome.org] 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 [technet.com] and Richard did not change his opinion.
Re:Curing Mono (Score:5, Insightful)
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
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
You are right, MS is interested that anyone using C#/.NET everywhere; but only if they are using it on Windows.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The promises are largely meaningless and empty.
http://www.osnews.com/story/21858/FSF_Microsoft_s_Community_Promise_Empty_ [osnews.com]
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.
Re: (Score:2)
We've still got people like Horacio Gutierrez (Corporate Vice President and Deputy General Counsel) making statements like this [microsoftontheissues.com]:
...Open innovation is only possible through the licensing of third party IP rights, which ensures that those who develop the building blocks that make a new technology possible are properly compensated for their investments in research and development. After all, technology just doesn’t appear, fully-developed, from Zeus’s head. It requires lots of hard work and resources to create....
Mr. Gutierrez would do well to choose better classical allusions. He refers to the birth myth of Athena [wikipedia.org], who sprung fully formed from Zeus' head, and uses it to explain how such a process could never happen with so-called Intellectual Property.
Athena was the goddess of knowledge and learning, and her appearance, fully formed, from the mind of Zeus was a deliberate reference to the nature of wisdom. So, in effect, Gutierrez has said, "Great ideas don't just spring fully formed from the collective mind, as de
Gqview (Score:3, Informative)
or what ever they call it now
Re:Gqview (Score:4, Informative)
geeqie is what it's called under the new Author. Crappy name but it really is the best gtk image viewer.
Shotwell is beta (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Shotwell is beta (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (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?
gthumb (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, 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.
Features (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.
Re: (Score:3)
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 wou
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
f-spot 0.7.0 - Jun 16 2010 - Full Steam Ahead!
So it looks promising in the short term. Perhaps there's been a bit of pressure on them? Too little too late?
Re: (Score:3, 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 ima
Re: (Score:2)
That's true, F-spot (or mono) has been much more stable lately, I still have an occasional crash every once a while, but I didn't have one in which I would loose any work or data in at least a year. A light table mode would be great, one where you can see several versions of a photo, zoom and pan them simultaneously, etc.
The feature I would most welcome a possibility to filter a photo through an external command, and read the result in as a new version. I often find myself exporting photo to a folder, ope
Re: (Score:2)
That's one thing that could be improved I agree. What I do is edit the image in whatever way I wanted to. Then I go to "Photo->New Version" to make a new copy of the image, right-click on the image and copy the place (the qualified filename) and then, in a terminal simply copy the edited one I made to the new version.
One thing that could help (apart from making a simpler plugin interface) would be to be able to simply tell F-spot that "this image is actually just a version of that one". Could be as easy
Re: (Score:2)
Like f-spot's killer feature, fucking with timestamps.
Will be in the next stable, works great in the development version.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Good, I hated F-Spot (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
The version in lucid doesn't seem to do that any more whereas Shotwell does this. So it's not "good riddance". They finally fixed the problem only to bring it back again in a different photo manager..
Yet another application rewritten in Gnome... (Score:3, Interesting)
When will we see true progress in integration, usability or features?
Re: (Score:2)
Amarok, Rhythmbox, and Firefox all seem to be coming along nicely (but you know they'll replace Firefox with Epiphany and Rhythmbox with something else sooner or later). The problem is very obvious: Gnome is suffering from creeping elegance, and noone will admit it.
Re:Yet another application rewritten in Gnome... (Score:5, 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.
Wrong criteria (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I fear they're missing for deliberate-yet-inane ideological reasons. The functionality is there, accessible through hotkeys applied in nonsensical ways; the designers seem to think a button to draw a line or shape is... somehow an undesirable compromise. It's been requested for years, but never been added, even through major UI redesigns.
Re: (Score:3, 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
Re:Next on the list... (Score:4, 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.
Re:Next on the list... (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. :)
Re: (Score:3)
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.
Re: (Score:3, 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 [kerneltrap.org] 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,
Re: (Score:2)
Fedora's been doing a pretty decent job of stripping out all of the non-free software. Licenses are a constant issue, and the Fedora Project maintains a long list of licenses that they will and will not accept [fedoraproject.org]. There's also their list of forbidden items [fedoraproject.org] (not the same as the list of license conflicts), which includes proprietary binary drivers, Flash, Sun Java, Moonlight, and TrueCrypt. Those limitations are the main reason for the existence of RPMFusion (and Livna for libdvdcss).
Re: (Score:2)
No. It's still wrapped in Wine, and it's still flaky.
Re:who cares if it uses mon or not (Score:5, 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..
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..
Re:who cares if it uses mon or not (Score:5, 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. :-/
Re:who cares if it uses mon or not (Score:5, Informative)
Re:who cares if it uses mon or not (Score:5, 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.
Re:who cares if it uses mon or not (Score:4, 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.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
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.
Re: (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.)
Re: (Score:2)
I have never tried it with a webcam (so far, I have not had a need to use one), but I have used xsane with a number of scanners, and I have never ran across one that would not work with it.
XSANE works - what alternative do you have? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You can always install a scanning or image editing tool from the repositories. The stupid thing is that the NDIS tool is not installed by default so you need to use a different type of network to download a tool to get some wireless cards to work.
Re:Great, now get rid of XSANE (Score:4, 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.
Re: (Score:2)
The GUI for xsane is perfectly adequate, if a little dated...
And as you pointed out, most scanner manufacturers supply something similar but the problem is you get something different with every scanner... At least xsane is consistent across devices.
Re:Great, now get rid of XSANE (Score:5, 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
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, 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.
Re:huh? (Score:5, Informative)
There is this discussion from 2009..
https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel-discuss/2009-December/010173.html [ubuntu.com]
and this one from May 2010..
https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-desktop/2010-May/002569.html [ubuntu.com]
Apart from that I can't find anything about a decision being made.
Re: (Score:2)
The difference is that media like the ones you listed can be converted with relative ease, consuming only CPU time. If the owners of codec related imaginary property threaten to sue, it's mostly a matter of transcoding stuff to alternatives like Theora, Vorbis or VP9. Programs written in C# or another .NET dependent language however can't be converted to a different language without a lot of actual human work.
s/VP9/VP8/ (Score:2)
When I said VP9 I actually meant VP8 [wikipedia.org].
Re: (Score:2)
From the blog you posted...
Firstly, F-Spot doesn't require you to import photos, there is a checkbox that says "Copy files to the Photos folder"
Secondly, Shotwell has the exact same tickbox and is enabled by default exactly like F-Spot.
Personally I prefer something this works rather then a program whose only remarkable feature is "it is written in Vala