On Jan 25, 8:03 pm, Jonathan Kamens <[email protected]> wrote: > Philip wrote: > > I would also add "...and minimal success". I don't know any happy > > picasa/linux users, > > Maybe you're not paying attention, then. > > I've said over and over again that I'm a "happy picasa/linux user." I > don't know how I can be any more explicit than that. I am extremely > impressed that Google took the time to enhance and improve WINE to make > Picasa run successfully on it. I am grateful for the work, and I > believe that the result runs quite well.> though it is quite successful on > Windows. I think > > this creates a vicious cycle - few people use picasa/linux because it > > is poor quality, but why create a native port for such a small user > > community? > > I think few people use it because Google hasn't done a good job of > packaging it, not because the application itself is unstable or performs > badly. > > Not to mention the fact that a release of Picasa 3.0 which was first > released almost a year ago to beta testers, was, for some unfathomable > reason, never released to the public. The Linux version of picasa 3.0 > in Google's "testing" repository is several months older (and buggier) > than the last one they released to beta testers. Technically, I'm not > supposed to tell you that -- beta testers who are given access to the > newer versions aren't supposed to talk about them in public. I suppose > we'll see if they still care enough about Linux Picasa to kick me out of > the beta program because of what I just said ;-). > > And then there's the fact that they didn't bother to release Picasa 3.5 > or 3.6 for Linux. > > Adoption and usage would be significantly higher if they did something > about these. Unfortunately, it seems that they don't think there's > enough ROI to invest the time it would take to do these, let alone the > much larger chunk of time to rewrite Picasa as a native app, which is > why I think the constant clamoring here for a native version is just > silly. Here's a clue: Google exists to make money. They will develop a > native Linux version of Picasa if they'll make money from doing so. > Given how successful Google is, it seems that they're pretty good at > figuring out what's going to make them money and what isn't.
I agree with Jonathan here. I, too, am a (relatively) happy Picasa for Linux (or perhaps, it would be more accurate to say, Picasa *on* Linux) user. What I miss are the excellent Google developers, Lei Zhang, who were not only active participants in this forum, but who gave us Linux users access to Picasa versions that worked well, albeit via Wine. I can understand that these skilful developers were called to other, more pressing duties when the Chrome browser was in the process of being developed (a great success !), but I hope that now Google will realise that Linux users do, in fact, constitute a vital element in user mix that avails themselves of Google product and allow these developers to return to Picasa for Linux !... Henri > Of course, that's what I've done now. Another plug: shotwell > >http://yorba.org/shotwell/ > > Thats for the pointer. I'll check out shotwell if/when I decide that > Picasa on WINE is as bad as people here seem to think it is ;-). > > jik -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google-Labs-Picasa-for-Linux" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-labs-picasa-for-linux?hl=en.
