PDA

View Full Version : Bye Bye GIMP!



Pages : 1 2 [3] 4

cariboo907
December 18th, 2009, 07:16 PM
Please keep the discussion on topic, mono has been discussed until the subject was deemed dead. If you have complaints or comments about mono, post them in the Monolith (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1202591&highlight=monolith) thread.

Merk42
December 18th, 2009, 07:39 PM
It seems strange when GIMP has to be omitted because their is a lack of cd space available...

It seems strange people think this is why it was removed.
It was removed because it was felt that the average user only needs crop/red eye/etc which would be in later (in time for Lucdid) version of F-Spot.

Gina
December 18th, 2009, 08:40 PM
It seems strange people think this is why it was removed.
It was removed because it was felt that the average user only needs crop/red eye/etc which would be in later (in time for Lucdid) version of F-Spot.Well, if F-Spot can really be improved that much in time for Lucid, or rather Ubuntu 10.04 release, then fair enough.

I think it was the prospect of no gimp and nothing to replace it's most used features that has upset most people.

hikaricore
December 19th, 2009, 07:05 AM
fwiw, I think it would be a mistake to get rid of GIMP.

^ sanity at last

zekopeko
December 19th, 2009, 12:53 PM
God is this thread stupid!

Go out and ask some 50 random people what does "Alpha channel transparency" or "Gaussian blur" mean to them and report back here. Then tell me with a straight face that GIMP should be part of "Linux for Human Beings".

ronacc
December 19th, 2009, 02:08 PM
I don't suppose they might be motivated to try them and find out ? Heaven forbid that they might discover some neat effects .Oh the Humanity of it .

qamelian
December 19th, 2009, 02:23 PM
God is this thread stupid!

Go out and ask some 50 random people what does "Alpha channel transparency" or "Gaussian blur" mean to them and report back here. Then tell me with a straight face that GIMP should be part of "Linux for Human Beings".
You don't need to understand those concepts or many like them for GIMP to still be more useful than the proposed changes to F-Spot. Apparently, the Human Beings you encounter are substanstially different from the ones I know. I know plenty of folks who use GIMP without knowing the most gory bits, and they still want more functionality than we are going to get from the improvements to F-Spot.

This thread is only stupid in the sense that removing GIMP from the live CD is stupid.

andrewabc
December 19th, 2009, 03:10 PM
God is this thread stupid!

Go out and ask some 50 random people what does "Alpha channel transparency" or "Gaussian blur" mean to them and report back here. Then tell me with a straight face that GIMP should be part of "Linux for Human Beings".

Go and ask 50 people how to resize images using fspot and they wouldn't know how either.

Quite frankly it is terrible and even I can barely figure it out.

"resize to x pixels" Which I think was vertical pixels, even though not explained. And you have to export it in order to see what it looks like after the resize, which is also stupid. Maybe someone wants to see what it looks like after resizing it before saving/exporting the image? Nah that is too complex. And the default save to folder is save as web gallery. I've never heard of any image program do that before. fspot is worse than gimp and should be removed.

novafluxx
December 19th, 2009, 03:43 PM
You don't need to understand those concepts or many like them for GIMP to still be more useful than the proposed changes to F-Spot. Apparently, the Human Beings you encounter are substanstially different from the ones I know. I know plenty of folks who use GIMP without knowing the most gory bits, and they still want more functionality than we are going to get from the improvements to F-Spot.

This thread is only stupid in the sense that removing GIMP from the live CD is stupid.

Are you one of those people who seem to think that if an app is removed from the live CD and from the default install, that you won't be able to get it or use it?


sudo apt-get install gimp
There, after you install 10.04, do that in a terminal, and win.

Thank you.

Its discussions like this and people who want the default install to include their favorite pet program/app/widget that have made me leave Ubuntu behind, and move on to openSUSE and Arch Linux, and BSD...

I'm tired of the child-like behavior here (I'm not speaking of you qamelian)

I started with Ubuntu, and I've graduated to more minimalistic distro's whose development forums aren't quite so rich with people wanting to include the kitchen sink and the garage door into the default install.

Why don't we include Arora, Chromium, and Firefox, and what the heck konqueror too in the default install! That way everyone has choice and doens't have to be burdened with installing something!

Lets just make the default install 40GB and include the ENTIRE REPO BY DEFAULT!! YEAH!!!!

ranch hand
December 19th, 2009, 03:49 PM
I believe that the average person in this case is the lower end of MS users that have no brain. These are the people that we, the Ubuntu community, are trying to attract.

Gimp looks nothing like they have ever seen. It will scare the bejezus out of them. It needs to go.

This is, of coarse, a big improvement. Over what I am not sure. What is being added does not seem all that impressive. But this is progress. Progress is good. Therefore this is good.

ronacc
December 19th, 2009, 04:09 PM
Its discussions like this and people who want the default install to include their favorite pet program/app/widget that have made me leave Ubuntu behind, and move on to openSUSE and Arch Linux, and BSD...



Wanting the gimp to remain is not about "someone" wanting their favorite app included . It is about keeping something that has been a part of ubuntu from the start and is also one of the crown jewels in the world of linux .

novafluxx
December 19th, 2009, 04:09 PM
I believe that the average person in this case is the lower end of MS users that have no brain. These are the people that we, the Ubuntu community, are trying to attract.

Gimp looks nothing like they have ever seen. It will scare the bejezus out of them. It needs to go.

This is, of coarse, a big improvement. Over what I am not sure. What is being added does not seem all that impressive. But this is progress. Progress is good. Therefore this is good.

AGREED, sir

zekopeko
December 19th, 2009, 04:14 PM
AGREED, sir

I think he was being sarcastic. But I could be wrong.

User3k
December 19th, 2009, 04:15 PM
My question is this. Do the people who think GIMP should go, do you all really think child like simplicity is the way to go with Ubuntu?

I don't mean to sound like an A^&. I do understand both sides, though I am one who thinks taking GIMP out of the default install or LiveCD is a bad idea. I am not really sure F-SPOT would be a good replacement either.

Now here is a question. I am not sure if this has been answered. Will Kubuntu and Xubuntu also follow Ubuntu and take GIMP out of the default install/LiveCD?

zekopeko
December 19th, 2009, 04:16 PM
Go and ask 50 people how to resize images using fspot and they wouldn't know how either.

Quite frankly it is terrible and even I can barely figure it out.

"resize to x pixels" Which I think was vertical pixels, even though not explained. And you have to export it in order to see what it looks like after the resize, which is also stupid. Maybe someone wants to see what it looks like after resizing it before saving/exporting the image? Nah that is too complex. And the default save to folder is save as web gallery. I've never heard of any image program do that before. fspot is worse than gimp and should be removed.

Go and ask 50 random people how to resize an image using F-spot that is going to ship with Lucid.

And report bugs on that behavior and propose an alternative one.

Merk42
December 19th, 2009, 04:26 PM
Wanting the gimp to remain is not about "someone" wanting their favorite app included . It is about keeping something that has been a part of ubuntu from the start and is also one of the crown jewels in the world of linux .

So, wait we should have GIMP on the LiveCD just because it's been in there before?
Why isn't there a thread about all the games being removed?
Where was the thread in that last dev forum when Ekiga was being removed?

CanadianBac0n77
December 19th, 2009, 05:56 PM
I agree, it takes up space that can be used for other apps. And you can always install it afterwards.

ronacc
December 19th, 2009, 07:06 PM
I am sick to death of the "its in the repos , you can install it later" excuse . By that exact same argument we should ship the kernel, a console and bash , everything else can be installed later.

Mr. Picklesworth
December 19th, 2009, 07:10 PM
I am sick to death of the "its in the repos , you can install it later" excuse . By that exact same argument we should ship the kernel, a console and bash , everything else can be installed later.

It's not really an excuse; it's just an explanation of why stripping unnecessary software from the default package is not the end of the world.

ronacc
December 19th, 2009, 07:19 PM
and I pointed out what is necessary.

zekopeko
December 19th, 2009, 07:59 PM
I am sick to death of the "its in the repos , you can install it later" excuse . By that exact same argument we should ship the kernel, a console and bash , everything else can be installed later.

Reductio ad absurdum if I ever saw one.

BwackNinja
December 19th, 2009, 08:08 PM
GIMP, as the name suggests, is an IMAGE Manipulation Program, F-Spot on the other hand, in relation to any of this "image manipulation" stuff, is a PHOTO Editor. Not only can you consider this a step back, but also a step to the side. F-Spot, even just considering the editing of images, is just going to be a photo editor, you won't even have the functionality of MS Paint in there. You CAN'T call that a replacement.

And then you all say just "sudo apt-get install gimp," as though that alleviates the problem. For one, you're saying a terminal command, and if you can figure out bash, you can figure out the GIMP. If such things as "layers" are too complicated for people, despite how the name should at least give a hing; if having the brush be the first tool shown by default and a primary/secondary color pallete that looks a bit like the one in MS Paint, where you get to choose a new color by clicking it is too difficult for people messing around drawing. I'm not even talking about the menus, where the wealth of the effects and actions are.

The buttons don't have labels, sure, but neither do those in openoffice, in MS Office, etc., and its not like people have trouble looking at the tooltips and finding what a button does, even if they don't know whether or not it exists and especially considering there are much fewer tools in the toolbar in the GIMP.

Programs have learning curves. People will only learn as much as they need to get by. The people who think that the GIMP must be much too complicated for them would be the people who at most regurgitate commands from the internet in the terminal, just following - not understanding - instructions. Those people might think its nice that the terminal is a place where you can do some things quickly, but will also look at it as archaic, as something old that should be replaced graphically.

Making linux something usable by the masses is a noble goal, but besides the point and the extent that we're going is insulting and seems to do its best to ensure that the masses remain ignorant.

Merk42
December 19th, 2009, 08:32 PM
You're right BwackNinja, F-Spot != GIMP. It's also not supposed to!

F-Spot = (GIMP - the hundreds of features the majority of people don't use/need)

This illustrates one of the two problems with a lot (but not all) of the people in this thread arguing for GIMP.

There is this notion that F-Spot doesn't equal GIMP and therefore should not be a replacement.
This is true, however GIMP was removed in favor of F-Spot because it only contains the handful of features the average user will need (red eye/crop/etc).
People open up F-Spot in Karmic and envision that as what will be in Lucid.
The version of F-Spot in Lucid will be different than what is currently in Karmic.

ronacc
December 19th, 2009, 08:59 PM
Reductio ad absurdum if I ever saw one.

of course it is a reducto ad absurdum . however I suggest that you learn what that term means .I will give you a hint , what it is "reducing to absurdity " is the proposition that "You can install it later" is a valid reason to delete something.

BwackNinja
December 19th, 2009, 09:13 PM
Merk42,

The way you say this just says that the average user is likely to want to sort and enhance photos, and make slideshows of them (hence the video editor, whose inclusion I think is completely absurd unless I think of it this way, and demotes such software to a glorified slideshow editor, just like openoffice is often demoted to a glorified note taking application. And all this is despite how the "average computer users" I know are nearly terrified by the prospect of having to make a photo slideshow). All the while, such a user is ever so unlikely to EVER need to edit an image? Or feel they need to enhance a picture beyond the capabilities of F-Spot?

Even if the installation of the GIMP is reduced to a click of a button surrounded by a bunch of arrows pointing to it saying "PICK ME!!!" I think such a user would still have a difficult time finding an app that would suit their needs, and most of that difficulty would arise from not even knowing what it is they wanted.

Merk42
December 19th, 2009, 09:24 PM
You kind of went on a run on sentence there for a bit so it was hard to follow.

I'm not saying what I think, just saying what Ubuntu thinks.

They feel that yes, the average user is not going to need to change a photo past what F-Spot will be capable of in Lucid
Rotation Scale Red Eye Removal Crop Color Balance Brightness and Contrast


The only "CLICK ME TO INSTALL" thing makes me think of the Firefox installer in Kubuntu. I wouldn't be opposed to this, but I think Ubuntu wouldn't like that since GNOME Shortcuts aren't for installing and such things would be in the featured applications of USC.

seeker5528
December 19th, 2009, 10:20 PM
of course it is a reducto ad absurdum . however I suggest that you learn what that term means .I will give you a hint , what it is "reducing to absurdity " is the proposition that "You can install it later" is a valid reason to delete something.

Did somebody say that was a valid reason for removing it? I must have missed that post.

It is a valid reason why removing it is a non-issue for 90+ percent of the people.

Later, Seeker

zekopeko
December 19th, 2009, 10:26 PM
of course it is a reducto ad absurdum . however I suggest that you learn what that term means .I will give you a hint , what it is "reducing to absurdity " is the proposition that "You can install it later" is a valid reason to delete something.

Now you are just being completely irrational.
Ubuntu's reason to remove GIMP is rooted in logical thinking following their stated goal. And that goal is to create an easy to use distribution that has software that is used by the majority of users.

GIMP isn't that software. From your perspective it might be but for the majority of users it isn't. And Ubuntu devs are aware of that fact. You might not agree with it but thats how it is.

I find it funny that you agree with my usage of the phrase reductio ad absurdum and then state that I didn't use it correctly and should learn what it means. Not to mention this quote:


Wanting the gimp to remain is not about "someone" wanting their favorite app included . It is about keeping something that has been a part of ubuntu from the start and is also one of the crown jewels in the world of linux .

Not really a great argument is it?

zekopeko
December 19th, 2009, 10:30 PM
And one thing that I don't understand is why moving an app to the repos is considered a death sentence

Linux has an awesome update/install mechanism. We are getting a great tool for displaying that fact with Ubuntu Software Center. And it was mentioned that GIMP is going to be heavily promoted in the featured section of USC.

Ric_NYC
December 19th, 2009, 10:33 PM
The Gimp is one of the few "5 stars"* applications in the open source universe ( :) my opinion )

It should be kept in Ubuntu.



* The Gimp, Firefox, Inkscape, Digikam, Openoffice, Blender (I dislike its interface, but it is a powerful tool), VirtualBox, etc are the best of the best "la crème de la crème" ...

kapi
December 19th, 2009, 10:33 PM
For goodness sake, get a grip!

Gimp is a fantastic tool that does practically anything that ps does. As a web developer I use Gimp on a windows platform (sorry it's just at work) every day, I spend all of my time at home on UBUNTU. The fact that ubuntu catered for gimp greatly attracted me to using linux in the first place. It showed that for a windows user there was an alternative that worked and provided professional results.

As a result of using ubuntu I have converted totally to linux (with the exception of the work place, which I have no control over). I found that the open source alternatives provided a new avenue for me to pursue. I tell everyone I meet that I use Ubuntu, heck I should get commission!

My point is, dropping applications because it saves a few megs is a bad move. Certain apps that have a high profile such as gimp, open office and firefox can serve as great ambassadors for Ubuntu and attract more users.

Don't do it, just because a fair percentage who aren't involved in design don't understand GIMP it doesn't mean that we all (including the future prospective users) lose out to the Ubuntu experience.

Merk42
December 19th, 2009, 10:44 PM
The Gimp is one of the few "5 stars"* applications in the open source universe ( :) my opinion )

It should be kept in Ubuntu.



* The Gimp, Firefox, Inkscape, Digikam, Openoffice, Blender (I dislike its interface, but it is a powerful tool), VirtualBox, etc are the best of the best "la crème de la crème" ...

Please show me where Inkscape, Digikam, Blender and Virtualbox are in the LiveCD.

yossell
December 19th, 2009, 10:44 PM
But - Kapi - this is what I don't get - I agree with everything you say here - but the suggestion is only to leave it off the live cd - not to abandon it altogether. I don't see how your considerations speak for the idea that, because it's an excellent program for people with a certain level of sophistication, it must therefore appear on the live cd.

Ric_NYC
December 19th, 2009, 10:52 PM
Please show me where Inkscape, Digikam, Blender and Virtualbox are in the LiveCD.

I was talking about "5 Stars" applications in my opinion...

seeker5528
December 19th, 2009, 11:09 PM
My point is, dropping applications because it saves a few megs is a bad move. Certain apps that have a high profile such as gimp, open office and firefox can serve as great ambassadors for Ubuntu and attract more users.

Don't do it, just because a fair percentage who aren't involved in design don't understand GIMP it doesn't mean that we all (including the future prospective users) lose out to the Ubuntu experience.

I'm surprised this hasn't been mentioned before in this thread or if it has I missed it.....

Maybe instead of complaining about what will be removed from the Ubuntu CD, people should be looking at Ubuntu Studio (https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuStudio).


ubuntustudio-graphics

A current, complete set of 2D/3D manipulation applications. ie: Inkscape, GIMP, Blender, and so on.

Package list:

inkscape blender gimp gimp-data-extras gimp-gap gimp-ufraw gimp-plugin-registry f-spot scribus fontforge gnome-raw-thumbnailer xsane wacom-tools hugin agave yafray synfigstudio

Description:

* inkscape - A vector-based drawing program.
* blender - A very fast and versatile 3D suite for modeling, animation, rendering, post-production, interactive creation and playback.
* gimp - A raster-based drawing program.
* gimp-data-extras - This package contains extra brushes, palettes, and gradients for extra GIMPy artistic enjoyment.
* gimp-gap - GAP is a collection of plug-ins to extend the GIMP with capabilities to edit and create animations and movies as sequences of single frames.
* gimp-gnomevfs - This package includes a plugin for GIMP which will open URIs (e.g. ftp:, http:, smb:, and sftp: ) using protocol handlers from GNOME-VFS.
* gimp-ufraw - A plug-in to import RAW images.
* gimp-plugin-registry - A collection of GIMP plugins.
* f-spot - A personal photo management application.
* scribus - A open source desktop page layout program.
* fontforge - Font Editor for PS, TrueType and OpenType fonts.
* gnome-raw-thumbnailer - a thumbnailer for GNOME that will make thumbnails for camera RAW files.
* xsane - GTK+-based X11 frontend for SANE. (Scanner Access Now Easy)
* wacom-tools - Software for you Wacom drawing pad.
* hugin - An easy to use cross-platform GUI for Panorama Tools.
* synfigstudio - A vector 2D based animation package (GUI)
* agave - Colorscheme generator.
* enblend - A tool for compositing images.
* yafray - A modern, xml-speaking raytracing-based rendering system
* nautilus-image-converter - nautilus extension to mass resize images

Somehow I doubt they will be dropping Gimp from that. ;)

I'm guessing though from the package list, that you don't get a live image with the capability to run the software, which would mean a few people that are wanting to be able to run Gimp from a live CD session, without having to install it every time, would still have a complaint.

Later, Seeker

novafluxx
December 20th, 2009, 12:23 AM
GIMP, as the name suggests, is an IMAGE Manipulation Program, F-Spot on the other hand, in relation to any of this "image manipulation" stuff, is a PHOTO Editor. Not only can you consider this a step back, but also a step to the side. F-Spot, even just considering the editing of images, is just going to be a photo editor, you won't even have the functionality of MS Paint in there. You CAN'T call that a replacement.

And then you all say just "sudo apt-get install gimp," as though that alleviates the problem. For one, you're saying a terminal command, and if you can figure out bash, you can figure out the GIMP. If such things as "layers" are too complicated for people, despite how the name should at least give a hing; if having the brush be the first tool shown by default and a primary/secondary color pallete that looks a bit like the one in MS Paint, where you get to choose a new color by clicking it is too difficult for people messing around drawing. I'm not even talking about the menus, where the wealth of the effects and actions are.

The buttons don't have labels, sure, but neither do those in openoffice, in MS Office, etc., and its not like people have trouble looking at the tooltips and finding what a button does, even if they don't know whether or not it exists and especially considering there are much fewer tools in the toolbar in the GIMP.

Programs have learning curves. People will only learn as much as they need to get by. The people who think that the GIMP must be much too complicated for them would be the people who at most regurgitate commands from the internet in the terminal, just following - not understanding - instructions. Those people might think its nice that the terminal is a place where you can do some things quickly, but will also look at it as archaic, as something old that should be replaced graphically.

Making linux something usable by the masses is a noble goal, but besides the point and the extent that we're going is insulting and seems to do its best to ensure that the masses remain ignorant.

Actually for the sake of my post, I typed the terminal command. I can't exactly type the way to do it through the Ubuntu Software Center.

You can do it that way too, and it'll take twice as long, but if you're a mouse lover who can't type terminal commands, I suppose thats fine :P

novafluxx
December 20th, 2009, 12:25 AM
And one thing that I don't understand is why moving an app to the repos is considered a death sentence

Linux has an awesome update/install mechanism. We are getting a great tool for displaying that fact with Ubuntu Software Center. And it was mentioned that GIMP is going to be heavily promoted in the featured section of USC.

AGREED, sir. People seem to think if it ain't on the default install/liveCD its GONE FOREVER!!!111 OMG ITZ GONEZERS...

Get real...wow

ronacc
December 20th, 2009, 01:01 AM
AGREED, sir. People seem to think if it ain't on the default install/liveCD its GONE FOREVER!!!111 OMG ITZ GONEZERS...

Get real...wow

you mis-characterise what people who don't want the gimp removed are saying . We know it can be installed (even if it's NOT in the repo's , it can be obtained elsewhere or built from source ) . We are saying that the livecd would be less useful without it . The fact that "many" or even "most" do not use the full capabilities of an app is no reason to remove it .If that is going to be the criterion for exclusion I have some other things to nominate .

User3k
December 20th, 2009, 01:02 AM
you mis-characterise what people who don't want the gimp removed are saying . We know it can be installed (even if it's not in the repo's , it can be obtained elsewhere or built from source ) . We are saying that the livecd would be less useful without it . The fact that "many" or even "most" do not use the full capabilities of an app is no reason to remove it .if that is going to be the criterion for exclusion i have some other things to nominate .

+1

ranch hand
December 20th, 2009, 01:49 AM
you mis-characterise what people who don't want the gimp removed are saying . We know it can be installed (even if it's NOT in the repo's , it can be obtained elsewhere or built from source ) . We are saying that the livecd would be less useful without it . The fact that "many" or even "most" do not use the full capabilities of an app is no reason to remove it .If that is going to be the criterion for exclusion I have some other things to nominate .

Yes, I certainly do not use OO.O spreadsheet to full advantage, never use presentation. I also never use any of the features of evolution.

This does not, in any way, mean that I think they should be removed any more than gimp should be removed.

Gimp will be on my system, I use it too much, it is a rare day that it is not in use.

NCLI
December 20th, 2009, 02:00 AM
you mis-characterise what people who don't want the gimp removed are saying . We know it can be installed (even if it's NOT in the repo's , it can be obtained elsewhere or built from source ) . We are saying that the livecd would be less useful without it . The fact that "many" or even "most" do not use the full capabilities of an app is no reason to remove it .If that is going to be the criterion for exclusion I have some other things to nominate .

YES IT IS.

I actually voted to keep the GIMP, but while reading this thread I've realized that it would serve no purpose. You are an advanced user. You are perfectly capable of making a new LiveCD for your own use in a matter of minutes, so that argument is absolutely moot.
No, you don't want to have to do it, just like I don't want to have to add Chromium or Yakuake to my LiveCDs, and GIMP too once Lucid comes around, but you know what? That's my problem, and I find Ubuntu's base package perfect for building my system on top of. If you know of a distro that you find as attractie as Ubuntu, with GIMP included, then perhaps that suits your needs better, and you should switch.

Now, the issue of new users being impressed by Ubuntu. The first thing most users will do the first time they boot the LiveCD is probably to click the "Applications" button.
What is the first thing they will notice there, which sticks out from the rest of the entries? The Ubuntu Software Center. What's the first thing they'll notice when opening that? Reccomended Apps. There, they will find GIMP on top of a small list of great, stable Linux applications, which can be installed and run off the LiveCD. How would that disappoint them?

I've installed Ubuntu for several people, and very few have noticed The GIMP the way it is located now without me telling them it's there, I've even had people try to install it from the internet. People will be more likely to notice it when heavily promoted in the USC.

User3k
December 20th, 2009, 02:22 AM
The good news is if Linux in general keeps moving in this direction there is always the BSD family, lol.


Edit - By the way I don't mean GIMP. But to go into it further would be off topic.

Dragonbite
December 20th, 2009, 04:32 AM
Wanting the gimp to remain is not about "someone" wanting their favorite app included . It is about keeping something that has been a part of ubuntu from the start and is also one of the crown jewels in the world of linux .

Like Evolution? Trying to remove that thing is a PITA!


I am sick to death of the "its in the repos , you can install it later" excuse . By that exact same argument we should ship the kernel, a console and bash , everything else can be installed later.

Isn't that what the Alternative CD supposed to accomplish?

You know, all this debating will not change the "powers-to-be", just get a lot of people hot-under-the-collar.

If they keep it, or lose it, I hope to still use Ubuntu in the future.

ranch hand
December 20th, 2009, 05:13 AM
Dragonbite has got this pretty much right. We really are beating a dead horse. I know, the horse is dead and doesn't care. But we probably could go on to something more productive.

ronacc
December 20th, 2009, 05:31 AM
you are quite right , the best we can do is agree to disagree .

BwackNinja
December 20th, 2009, 05:46 AM
YES IT IS.

I actually voted to keep the GIMP, but while reading this thread I've realized that it would serve no purpose. You are an advanced user. You are perfectly capable of making a new LiveCD for your own use in a matter of minutes, so that argument is absolutely moot.
No, you don't want to have to do it, just like I don't want to have to add Chromium or Yakuake to my LiveCDs, and GIMP too once Lucid comes around, but you know what? That's my problem, and I find Ubuntu's base package perfect for building my system on top of. If you know of a distro that you find as attractie as Ubuntu, with GIMP included, then perhaps that suits your needs better, and you should switch.

Now, the issue of new users being impressed by Ubuntu. The first thing most users will do the first time they boot the LiveCD is probably to click the "Applications" button.
What is the first thing they will notice there, which sticks out from the rest of the entries? The Ubuntu Software Center. What's the first thing they'll notice when opening that? Reccomended Apps. There, they will find GIMP on top of a small list of great, stable Linux applications, which can be installed and run off the LiveCD. How would that disappoint them?

I've installed Ubuntu for several people, and very few have noticed The GIMP the way it is located now without me telling them it's there, I've even had people try to install it from the internet. People will be more likely to notice it when heavily promoted in the USC.

No, its not. I'd say the majority of those who use openoffice almost never use more than writer, especially with the difficulty I see people trying to use a spreadsheet program as it is. And in writer, most people would use little more than text alignment and styles - not even touching the menus. But there are cases where they do need more, cases where they would not want to have to download a new program and re-open their work to overcome the shortcomings of the program they were using. This is why software should never be made to meet the needs of users. No, that's a terrible idea. It should always be made to exceed them.

Replacing a piece of software with another that is only good enough for 75% of the previously happy users 75% of the time isn't something to be proud of. Its like going the Chromium OS route. Yes, a browser is a powerful thing. Yes, with great integration people might like it and get used to it. However, self-imposed limitations - only having the most used features there - is what will make people wonder why they've decided to live in a world of walls, rather than outside in the fields.

This works not only as a decision on an individual piece of software, but as a precedent as well. The "you can install it later" argument isn't one that should be made with such an operating system. This isn't Arch Linux. You want all the most useful things on the CD, on the default install. Bigger installation media doesn't solve the problem. Bigger downloads to get a piece of software on an expensive or slow or bandwidth restricted line, and especially ironically if it was there previously and for a long time, are bad. Downloading an old .iso instead of the most recent one in order to save on bandwith is just sad. The GIMP is a regular, not just an extreme artistic Ubuntu Studio only application.

ranch hand
December 20th, 2009, 06:03 AM
Oh my, BwackNinja, well said. Beating a dead horse or not, that was just lyric.

And to make a comparison to horses, if you are out gathering cattle, most of your time is spent riding through empty country (this time of year you are also freezing parts of your body off that you would really like to keep) and really any horse with a pulse will do,

But then you you run into a cranky cow or a bull on the fight and you really, really need a horse with a lot left and a lot of cow handling skills of its own.

In other words, suddenly you need a whole different level of capability. If you are lucky, like me, you have a horse that is better and faster to react than you are. You just hang on and give her (yes I ride a mare) her head and watch the fun as some nasty bovine tries to get away.

Nothing in the Linux universe will do that in photo editing except gimp.

I use it nearly daily (I did today and am going to do some more in a minute) and I can tell you I know nothing of MOST of what it can do. Someday I will need that though and I will be pleased to learn something new instead of just settling for "almost" right.

If you have limited tools, YOU are limited, not the tool.

kapi
December 21st, 2009, 02:31 PM
But - Kapi - this is what I don't get - I agree with everything you say here - but the suggestion is only to leave it off the live cd - not to abandon it altogether. I don't see how your considerations speak for the idea that, because it's an excellent program for people with a certain level of sophistication, it must therefore appear on the live cd.

Hi again,the point I was trying to make was that if you leave it off the cd then prospective future/new users to Ubuntu may not decide to convert to linux primarily because they think(because they don't know) that all they see on the live cd is all they get. I never really discovered the power of linux until I decided to go the whole hog and switch. People I have introduced to linux simply didn't realise the software available until I showed them.

Mr. Picklesworth
December 21st, 2009, 05:41 PM
Hi again,the point I was trying to make was that if you leave it off the cd then prospective future/new users to Ubuntu may not decide to convert to linux primarily because they think(because they don't know) that all they see on the live cd is all they get. I never really discovered the power of linux until I decided to go the whole hog and switch. People I have introduced to linux simply didn't realise the software available until I showed them.

That is the type of problem that needs to be - and can be - addressed at its source.

zekopeko
December 21st, 2009, 05:59 PM
That is the type of problem that needs to be - and can be - addressed at its source.

USC should be more prominent since its the fix for this problem. I think that it's shown during the install slideshow but it would also be nice to add it to the panel. or favorites on UNE.

Another venue to expose it is the firefox start page. Adding "Did you know" tip below the search box with a link to a bigger article would be super nice.

CJN
December 21st, 2009, 06:53 PM
After reading this. I'm inclined to agree with not having it on the default installation. However, there needs to be SOMETHING there. Windows comes with Windows Paint, and I'm sure OS X has to come with something as well (I don't know for sure since I don't own a Mac).

Leaving users with nothing is a bad idea, in my honest opinion. If you want to hit the majority of users, you still need SOMETHING.

Actually OS X doesn't come with a decent image editing program (read: there is NO WAY TO SET TRANSPARENCY IN AN IMAGE WITH A DEFAULT INSTALL OF OS X + iLife + iWork) this is by far my biggest (read: only) complaint about Mac and it irks me to no end! They actually ship the source code for a decent jumping off point for a paint like program with ADT but haven't bothered to polish it up and include it in their OS! I mean iPhoto is a nice organizer but it doesn't edit worth dirt. I actually reboot into Ubuntu every time I want to edit a photo because of this (FROM A GRAPHICS-DESIGNER oriented OS!) it just doesn't make sense to me to take GIMP away from the masses, because believe me, I know plenty of people who will never have more software installed on their computers than what I put there, because they don't know a thing about the terminal, and (as sad as this is) are too afraid to mess around with other settings (because we mustn't forget that this IS linux and it is scary for a lot of people)

str_ardi_per
December 23rd, 2009, 04:35 PM
GIMP is the best

gsmanners
December 23rd, 2009, 08:32 PM
I use GIMP on a near-daily basis, but then I'm using Xubuntu so Ubuntu can go ahead and remove it. I trust the Xubuntu devs will do the right thing and leave it.

User3k
December 23rd, 2009, 08:34 PM
I use GIMP on a near-daily basis, but then I'm using Xubuntu so Ubuntu can go ahead and remove it. I trust the Xubuntu devs will do the right thing and leave it.

I also have much faith in the Xubuntu Devs. They kept Pulseaudio out of Xubuntu and that is a huge plus in my eyes.

zekopeko
December 23rd, 2009, 11:36 PM
I also have much faith in the Xubuntu Devs. They kept Pulseaudio out of Xubuntu and that is a huge plus in my eyes.

That would actually mean something if Xubuntu was using the same sound system as Ubuntu. Ubuntu switched because Gnome was planning to switch and not support the old system any longer.

User3k
December 23rd, 2009, 11:52 PM
That would actually mean something if Xubuntu was using the same sound system as Ubuntu. Ubuntu switched because Gnome was planning to switch and not support the old system any longer.

I was unaware that it was Gnome that was doing the changing. I thought it was something Ubuntu was trying out.

Even though. I am still impressed with the way Xubuntu is put together and I think they have done a good job on it.

joey-elijah
December 24th, 2009, 12:07 AM
Actually OS X doesn't come with a decent image editing program (read: there is NO WAY TO SET TRANSPARENCY IN AN IMAGE WITH A DEFAULT INSTALL OF OS X + iLife + iWork) this is by far my biggest (read: only) complaint about Mac and it irks me to no end! They actually ship the source code for a decent jumping off point for a paint like program with ADT but haven't bothered to polish it up and include it in their OS! I mean iPhoto is a nice organizer but it doesn't edit worth dirt. I actually reboot into Ubuntu every time I want to edit a photo because of this (FROM A GRAPHICS-DESIGNER oriented OS!) it just doesn't make sense to me to take GIMP away from the masses, because believe me, I know plenty of people who will never have more software installed on their computers than what I put there, because they don't know a thing about the terminal, and (as sad as this is) are too afraid to mess around with other settings (because we mustn't forget that this IS linux and it is scary for a lot of people)

I think that sort of "fear" will dissipate as The Software Centre matures - particularly with the idea's floating around of "app suites" such as a graphics suite (with gimp, inkscape, etc).

I'm not fussed by GIMP not being there by default, but i am sad at what is left behind in its place. F-Spot pales against other applications and is to photo management apps what microsoft paint is to graphics tools...

My sister (who can't really tell an OS from a browser) really does like F-Spot. Its auto-editing tools ruin her photos, it slows her laptop down, it's not entirely intuitive to navigate and she HATES having to import stuff just to edit it. She used to call it "that photo thing with an F in it for a reason"

The forthcoming newly re-written gThumb blows f-Spot out of the water and into the wastebasket - and my sister no longer complains since i switched her over to Gthumb 2.0.

Murdoc_of_puts
December 25th, 2009, 08:53 PM
It's been said a couple of times through, but I think it would be a good option to remove gimp. However, since it's recommended to be hooked up to the internet, when your installing; could you have a couple of downloadable options at install. For example- have a "editors" or "neat others" option at install that would just be a link to the repos, rather than an installable program on the disc. You could do this with a lot of the really neat programs that make Linux so good. Because I may have never have known about gimp, had it not been on the disc, until much, much later. I think that alot of people new to Linux are the same way. They don't know it's out there, unless it installs from the disc and then they mess around with it when they're bored. I think that there's a lot of programs that are just about useless, and always end up removing them after install. I think it would be a good idea to put big programs that many people may not use regularly into a download link style, for example GIMP, Open Office, avidemux, sound converter, audacity. Or make available a "multimedia" package that has all of those things on it, but has less programing, and office things on it.

waspbr
December 25th, 2009, 09:10 PM
I reckon that the way to tackle this would be to introduce a customization wizard of some sort. Something that would allow you to select some of the most popular packages, like gimp, vlc, openoffice and all.

I reckon this could be incorporated as part of the software centre as an icon in the notification area to be deployed as soon as the internet connection is detected for the first time.

Of course this would make the whole OS very reliant on having an internet connection.

just a thought tho

I don't use GIMP all the time but I got used to it, whenever I want to edit a picture I go to it, it does take some getting used to.

keypox
December 26th, 2009, 12:42 AM
I think its super complicated, but shouldnt be removed :/

MaxIBoy
December 26th, 2009, 12:47 AM
No, GIMP is not too complicated. No, this is not a "major step back." You can easily reinstall it.

pi.boy.travis
December 26th, 2009, 12:51 AM
No, GIMP is not too complicated. No, this is not a "major step back." You can easily reinstall it.

I concur. I think this is a big fuss over nothing. Haven't we learned this lesson from the empathy/pidgin incident?

HousieMousie2
December 26th, 2009, 08:14 AM
Windows tries to be all things to all people and fails to be much of anything to anyone, except bloated.

I would rather see them remove GIMP than come up with a GIMP-Lite version.

Users can download an Intel or AMD version, a 32 or 64 bit version. Bravo. This beats putting all versions on the same disk and having room for little else.

Perhaps the way to go would be to offer even more targeted versions, a gamers version, an artists version, a musicians version and so on. Or perhaps even a web interface that would allow a user to select various options, this processor, this video card, this audio card, this wireless card and so on. It seems to me that the repositories and dependencies lists are all ready primed for such an idea.

While Microsoft is busy trying to be everything to everyone and is becoming less and less customizable, taking away more and more user controls, and replacing them with a One Size Fits All OS, perhaps the other side of the coin is where Ubuntu should be headed (back to.) More customization before the disk is ever installed.

BwackNinja
December 26th, 2009, 08:44 AM
I agree with the thought that a GIMP-Lite version is a horrid thing to think up, but I can't say that I agree with making a lot of different ubuntus for different audiences. Those are things that would however do well as application groups in Ubuntu Software Center.

Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu, Lubuntu, Mythbuntu, and CrunchBang all exist because they are entirely different environments from one another, but all except for Mythbuntu really try to do the exact same thing, give a well-rounded set of applications - good defaults for everyday tasks.

Microsoft Windows doesn't have so much of choice in how it runs because Microsoft can't recreate a lot of the kinds of programs that are able to be included in Ubuntu, simply because it would take too much money and time when much better alternates exist and would drive up the price of the operating system, as well as because they'd run into so many anti-trust issues (hence the Internet Explorer debacle). Vista wasn't so great, but Windows 7 runs beautifully.

I'm still sad to see the GIMP disappear from the CD, but I guess if its usage is really that low, its for the best, and at worst it'll still just allow the devs to be able to play around a little more.

gsmanners
December 26th, 2009, 06:59 PM
No, GIMP is not too complicated. No, this is not a "major step back." You can easily reinstall it.

I don't really get this. "Complicated?" What part of the GIMP really is complicated? Is it the neat and logical arrangement of the menus, or is it really such a pain to drag and drop things if you don't like where they are in the UI?

ranch hand
December 26th, 2009, 07:25 PM
I don't really get this. "Complicated?" What part of the GIMP really is complicated? Is it the neat and logical arrangement of the menus, or is it really such a pain to drag and drop things if you don't like where they are in the UI?
I hate to have it off the CD but I agree with you.

I have never had Photoshop and I only got into using gimp about 9-10 months ago. There is a lot to learn but I wouldn't call it complex and all I do is photo editing that really can't be automated so you have to do it your self. My prior experience is with a dark room. The language isn't even the same.

If it was complicated a grumpy geezer like me wouldn't be using it.

HousieMousie2
December 27th, 2009, 01:38 AM
I agree with the thought that a GIMP-Lite version is a horrid thing to think up, but I can't say that I agree with making a lot of different ubuntus for different audiences. Those are things that would however do well as application groups in Ubuntu Software Center.

Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu, Lubuntu, Mythbuntu, and CrunchBang all exist because they are entirely different environments from one another, but all except for Mythbuntu really try to do the exact same thing, give a well-rounded set of applications - good defaults for everyday tasks.

------------snip-----------


Forgive me if I was not clear. I was not talking about another split off of Ubuntu. They would all still be Ubuntu, same front-end, same release-wall papers, same basic tools, same everything, the only difference would be which extra software goodies would be burned to the Live CD. Many people have no need for the OpenOffice suite, any simple text editor would meet their needs. Not everyone owns a Wacom device. I have no need for Bluetooth on my desktop. Yet these things, like the GIMP, are (have been) on every Live CD, taking up space that could be used for other things.

I am by no means a computer geek, though I am not technologically challenged either, but if my computer geek Linux-veteran Father had not been on the phone with me for my first attempted installation of Linux, I probably would not have stuck with Linux because my machine required a video driver that did not come on the Live CD. My first impression of Linux would not have been a good one.

There are two conflicting attitudes in the Linux community. One that takes the stance that Linux should not be altered so that the average 'soccer mom' can just pop it in and run it without having to learn the command line. The other stance is one that wants to compete for user shares with Windows and Mac... to gain wider usage by 'soccer mom's.
While to some degree I empathize with the first camp, I live squarely in the second. I want to see Linux take over the world. :D

I do not find the notion of customizing the installation CD to meet driver and/or software needs to be outlandish. As I said, I think the way Linux is fashioned, using packages, listing dependencies, and the way the repositories are organized would already lend itself to this idea.

Making someone's Live CD be as close to the machine they want as possible for their first installation and every subsequent re-installation sounds like a good idea to me... and as far from what Windows is trying to foist off on people as possible.

It is still Ubuntu if I uninstall Bluetooth. It is still Ubuntu if I install an extra video driver. The difference would be that I would not have to do those things every single time I re-install, my installation CD would already include what I want and not what I don't want. I am an artist... I would include the GIMP on my CD. :-)

ccleanerfan
December 27th, 2009, 02:09 AM
We need a Paint.NET equivalent.

zekopeko
December 27th, 2009, 02:35 AM
We need a Paint.NET equivalent.

Somebody could take the last open-source release, strip the non-free parts, strip winforms and build a GTK# GUI around it.

BwackNinja
December 27th, 2009, 03:30 AM
Forgive me if I was not clear. I was not talking about another split off of Ubuntu. They would all still be Ubuntu, same front-end, same release-wall papers, same basic tools, same everything, the only difference would be which extra software goodies would be burned to the Live CD. Many people have no need for the OpenOffice suite, any simple text editor would meet their needs. Not everyone owns a Wacom device. I have no need for Bluetooth on my desktop. Yet these things, like the GIMP, are (have been) on every Live CD, taking up space that could be used for other things.

--slice--

What you are talking about is something like Ubuntu Studio, as the only spin of Ubuntu of its style, already does. Ubuntu Studio is another collection of packages, a distro in itself, but not of the same attempts to fulfill all the basic tasks, but to work well with the artistically inclined. It still has Gnome, it has a different theme though.

I was going to give a really long reply, but it seemed too much like a rant, so here's the tl;dr version:

As you stated well in your post, there are two conflicting attitudes in the linux community. You fit in the second, while I fit in the first. I'm sure though that we both more or less agree somewhere in the middle is ideal. I fit more in the first category because I believe that its not so much that linux isn't ready for the 'soccer mom' but rather, the 'soccer mom' is not ready for linux. People say 'linux will replace windows,' but 'replace' isn't a good word for it. Linux is not windows, and the differences people see should be celebrated rather than its similarities. Look up the "Linux is not Windows" article if you haven't read it already. Its reasonably old, but it hasn't lost relevance.

Spreading linux is difficult. You need to always be available for someone you install linux for, unless they are the type of person (read: computer geek) who will look things up themselves and try to understand it rather than just saying it doesn't work and going back to what they know. The 'soccer mom' crowd isn't looking for linux, they're looking for windows, for the familiarity and for the support by those around them. Trying to make linux into a windows replacement is bad because it takes away a lot of what linux is.

There would be a lot of different CDs for a lot of different crowds, and that does not underline the fact that you can get it all from any one of them. If you remove ubuntu-desktop and install xubuntu-desktop, does that mean that you're still running ubuntu? The problem with drawing a line is that where you draw it may or may not be meaningful. To be officially supported, all those applications on all those CDs would have to be moved to main, etc. If it means so much to you, then spin your own CD. Basics first, everything else, later. Application groups in Ubuntu Software Center will make things easier for different crowds.

thecityofgold2006
December 27th, 2009, 10:05 AM
The whole concept of the Live CD is dated and should be something Ubuntu is looking beyond. Amost all computers will be connected to the net these days so the distro core should be minimal with options to install extra programs after installation. For the tiny minority without internet connection there are many variations on Ubuntu that they could download.

ronacc
December 27th, 2009, 11:58 AM
Windows users are fed constant doses of fear about installing anything on their computers that isn't from an "official" source (read that as microsoft approved) especially things downloaded off the net , a live cd gives them a chance to try Ubuntu without insatlling it . while just plugging in a cd is enough to "contaminate" a windows box they don't fear that as much.

HousieMousie2
December 27th, 2009, 12:28 PM
...........snip........
I was going to give a really long reply, but it seemed too much like a rant, so here's the tl;dr version:

As you stated well in your post, there are two conflicting attitudes in the linux community. You fit in the second, while I fit in the first. I'm sure though that we both more or less agree somewhere in the middle is ideal. I fit more in the first category because I believe that its not so much that linux isn't ready for the 'soccer mom' but rather, the 'soccer mom' is not ready for linux. People say 'linux will replace windows,' but 'replace' isn't a good word for it. Linux is not windows, and the differences people see should be celebrated rather than its similarities. Look up the "Linux is not Windows" article if you haven't read it already. Its reasonably old, but it hasn't lost relevance.

Spreading linux is difficult. You need to always be available for someone you install linux for, unless they are the type of person (read: computer geek) who will look things up themselves and try to understand it rather than just saying it doesn't work and going back to what they know. The 'soccer mom' crowd isn't looking for linux, they're looking for windows, for the familiarity and for the support by those around them. Trying to make linux into a windows replacement is bad because it takes away a lot of what linux is.
.......snip........

Rant if you want to. :-) I'll read it.

I agree that there SHOULD be a learning curve, I think where we would disagree is on how steep it should be. Security and stability comes at a cost, I don't mind paying it. I just don't believe that the average computer user will feel the same or have the time even if they did feel the same. I suppose I lament that... they are missing out.

I see where you are coming from with the 'replace' comment, neither of us wants Linux to become Windows, but I don't think that is what is meant when people say that... rather they hope that Linux will make Windows a thing of the past. (And yes, I agree that article is a MUST for anyone new to Linux or considering Linux, I read it and bookmarked it long ago.)

Many of my Windows friends are jumping ship for Mac (good advertising) because they are sick of Windows, and do not care if it is different, they just want it to work... point and click. There is still a learning curve, just not as steep as the command line.

Um... can you say 'hijacked thread'? lol Sorry folks.

HousieMousie2
December 27th, 2009, 12:34 PM
Windows users are fed constant doses of fear about installing anything on their computers that isn't from an "official" source (read that as microsoft approved) especially things downloaded off the net , a live cd gives them a chance to try Ubuntu without insatlling it . while just plugging in a cd is enough to "contaminate" a windows box they don't fear that as much.

I agree. Allowing Windows users to try Linux without changing their machines is the first step to gaining a new Linux user, especially the solo experimenter who does not have a Linux friend who's machine they can poke around on. If the CD were just the bare bones it would not make much of an impression... at least not a good one.

Alex De Duck
December 27th, 2009, 12:36 PM
For me, a newb, I never saw the use of Gimp. It is too complicated for me, but I see where it can be handy. As long as it's still available, I'd leave people a choice.

patched
December 27th, 2009, 01:21 PM
I'm a newbie to Linux and at the moment uncomfortable with commandline etc... (because of ignorance) but if my reward for switching from an operating system I've put up with for years and is easy to use (neglecting here the price paid for that simplicity) is a free but daunting and featureless (until I got the internet connection working correctly perhaps) OS I'd be itching to switch back to Windows again.

I'm one of those who knows about the GIMP, Inkscape, & Blender because I am in the group that uses/used Illustrator/photoshop/3D Studio Max etc.. and so knows of and where to find the GIMP if it isn't on the Live CD. For those who don't however, they're unlikely to chance upon it unless it's already in their installed software collection.

Also, it's been a while since I used these programs but the GIMP seems to be just as capable as PS in most tasks, and if there isn't a button for "do x" there is probably a short sequence of buttons that result in x for anyone determined enough.
One of the posters on page 1 said GIMP can't do outer glows for example. If memory serves me correctly, this was acheived (behind the scenes) in PS by linking a "glow" layer with the layer which you wanted to glow, and this glow layer was merely a feathered selection filled with the glow colour.

just my two pence worth

jesushero
December 27th, 2009, 05:16 PM
Well, obviously, there's the division between the "experts" and those who have just been convinced to try out a GNU/Linux distro for the first time.

For the experts, this is an excellent move, as it will save space and time. Quicker installs, less disk space. For this matter, I'd suggest we remove ALL applications apart from the core system to save even more space and time. I'd really like such an install environment, with a text-based installer as well as the live-cd gets on my nerves. When I'm the one downloading, I always choose the alternate CD.

But then again, Ubuntu is considered the distro that "convinces" most first-timers to fully make the switch. Most first timers are already worried enough with everything right there for them. If we start taking things out, they'll panic! They'll probably go and BUY 2 copies of windows 7 after that plus the first 10 expensive bits of software they see, to get over the shock of a bare-bones distro...

So for them, the best idea is to keep the live-cd with all the useful bits of software there by default. GIMP is a very strong "selling point" for Ubuntu. This is the point when everyone I've ever converted goes "OK, I'm switching".

So how about a bare-bones text-only installer for the experts and a live-cd with all the pretty things on for the first timers? The problem is that most people who switch on their own, without an "expert" around, will probably not find GIMP on their own. You need to know what it is to look for it. If they don't find it and they need PS, they'll switch back.

I've also just remembered to add that several people I know switch to a GNU/Linux distro out of ethical and political beliefs, without having anyone there to guide them. Also, in some less developed countries, people just get an Ubuntu cd from their friend but have absolutely no way of accessing the internet. They just want a few key applications to do what they have been doing with a Windows system without access to the internet. These people appreciate Ubuntu-Studio more than plain Ubuntu, simply because it offers them a lot of audio and video applications by default. If plain Ubuntu comes with close to nothing, they'll just keep on using Windows. I do not see this as "acceptable" from an ethical perspective.

cprofitt
December 28th, 2009, 05:57 AM
This is just from the LiveCD / default install
Gimp will (obviously) still be in the repos

I think it's a good call
I don't see the need for specialist apps in the default install

@CoreyB
the devs have said quite a few times that keeping the <700Mb limit is good for maintaining focus and priorities
It's less about CD vs. DVD, and more about not overloading a default install

Given that I can see removing the following apps from the liveCD:


F-Spot
Disk Usage Analyzer
Brasero (who will burn a CD/DVD from a liveCD?)

Perhaps there can be both LiveCDs and LiveDVDs in the future.

Merk42
December 28th, 2009, 05:59 AM
Given that I can see removing the following apps from the liveCD:


F-Spot
Disk Usage Analyzer
Brasero (who will burn a CD/DVD from a liveCD?)

Perhaps there can be both LiveCDs and LiveDVDs in the future.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't the applications on the LiveCD the same that are on the install and vice versa?

ibuclaw
December 28th, 2009, 07:31 AM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't the applications on the LiveCD the same that are on the install and vice versa?

Not quite - well, the installation is pretty much a direct mirror/copy from the CD /. to the Hard Disk /.
Then Ubiquity chroots in and installs some extra packages (ie: Language Packs) that couldn't be fit onto the CD (if internet connection is present) and removes what isn't needed (RAID, LVM, Ecrypt and Partitioning Tools). And finally rounds everything off by dpkg-reconfigure'ing most packages to suit your system setup (ie: udev).

Regards
Iain

BwackNinja
December 28th, 2009, 09:09 AM
@HousieMousie2: Since you asked for it, I was even nice enough to include a table of contents:

First of all, you're right. We really do seem to agree on the basics, just not the extents. Not entirely sure how much of this pertains to what we are discussing, but at least I enjoyed writing it. It should give a reasonably clear view of how I think of Linux now and why the reasons behind why I think the way I do.

1. My Linux Introduction
2. The Chicken and the Egg Problem
3. Assume it Can
4. Assume it Can't
5. Oooh, Shiny
6. Yuck, Ugly
7. The Benefits of Cross-Platform *This is actually relevant to this thread!!!
8. The Toll of Cross-Platform
9. When Will it be Ready?
10. Conclusion


1. My Linux Introduction

To help you see where I came from, here's my introduction to Ubuntu.

A friend told me about Linux, or rather, just about Ubuntu. He told me that because I was such a computer geek it was surprising that I wasn't already using it. I downloaded a few different copies of Ubuntu because I saw the "Long Term Service (Dapper)" and the "Regular (Edgy)." I had trouble burning it (I didn't know about setting the write speed to really slow) so I burned it on dvds, and that worked fine. The first thing I noticed when I booted up and started the installation was that I had a large portion of unallocated space on my hard drive. This was nice because then I didn't have to worry about shrinking my Windows partition (this was because the Windows installer could only make a partition of ~128GB and I had a 200GB HDD) especially considering that back then NTFS support was kinda shaky.

I boot it up, and I notice the resolution is wrong. I wanted 1360x768, but I only got 1024x768. I was a bit annoyed to say the least. Back then I still booted into Windows frequently and Ubuntu was just a little toy to play around with. I scoured the internet for a solution. I wasn't part of UbuntuForums and I wasn't planning on joining, but I read stuff from here, I tried and failed miserably. What's worse is that I somehow missed the existance of "gnome-terminal" and only used the TTY when I was entering a command in. Yes, it was a pain. And to top it all off, I couldn't play glchess in 3D mode because it would crash. Hooray ATi Radeon X300 PCIE.

Eventually of course, I found the magical cure and fixed my resolution problem and 3D drivers have come a long way since then (I can actually have Compiz running and play glchess in 3D mode!!! DRI2 is a wonder to behold). In short, I had a fairly rough introduction to Ubuntu with no one really helping me, and I'm not entirely sure what kept me here. It might've been Beryl though :P. At least it forced me to learn the system a bit more. But with how much I've seen linux and Ubuntu come and how much I enjoy watching it mature, I start to think the "Linux is ready for the mainstream" thought. Surely since its come this way it must be ready. But then I think of what still needs to be done, how much of it is still unstable and in heavy developement, and how much some things are just pushed back to maybe be tackled in the next release.


2. The Chicken and the Egg Problem

A big problem with linux is that there isn't the support from hardware vendors that Windows gets. The solution is market share. Unfortunately, its support from hardware vendors that would get some better market share. This is not so much of a problem right now as it used to be because ther is increasing market share, some hardware vendors are working with linux, and drivers are reasonably good. Problems arise because of the nature of linux itself: open-source. Closed-source hardware drivers will give you by default a system that does not fully work because they cannot be included. You even experienced it yourself, and it almost stopped you from using linux. For linux, closed source drivers only is something that seems inherently bad for new installs - the solution is at least having good vendors distributing linux on computers. Market share is actually incerasing anyway though, which is good, but hardware support (and I mean good hardware support) still lags far behind their release dates and the 6 month release schedule means that you may have to wait that 6 months or possibly more to have your hardware drivers in a stable version of linux if you try to stay on the cutting edge with your hardware.


3. Assume it Can

The assumption that linux can do everything is nice and better represents how linux actually is, but taking it too far people start expecting such things like their windows applications all working in linux too. What's worse, is that they can. Wine, which is a wonderful program, allows you to do such a thing, but introducing it to a new user can bring more pain than good. You can tell them that their windows applications can work with it, which may or may not give them false hope, and may also stop them from trying open source solutions. You can also tell them that their windows applications may not work with it, which may sell Wine as a somewhat useless and unreliable program, and they may then never use it, and also may not use linux because of some needs they have. Assumming perfect compatibility, even in OpenOffice.org, isn't something that you can or should really rely on.


4. Assume it Can't

The other extreme ends quite quickly. Assuming that Ubuntu cannot complete a task that you haven't already seen done or think is at all complicated, you don't use it. Not putting forth the effort to search for solutions, even if it is just within Ubuntu Software Center, can leave a user with a poor linux experience. Mac OSX for example is known by the common man as an operating system where people do artsy things on. Windows of course, is known for its games and general purpose applications as well. Ubuntu, or rather, linux in general, does not have such a position yet in society where it is known for really anything. There are many things that it is really good at, one of note is realtime audio.


5. Oooh, Shiny

There are the people who come to linux because they see things like Compiz and KDE4. Some of these people are great additions, others (maybe even most) are not. To look pretty in this age is to be a modern OS that can do whatever you could want from it. The 2D and 3D manipulations and effects you can do drag along with them expectations. If you can do that with just your desktop, drivers must be complete and games must be plentiful. There are games. There are good games. There are games from commercial vendors with ports to linux (completely ignoring here how much they are delayed...). But you generally can't just go to the store, get a game and expect it to work. Back to the "Assume it Can." Disappointment shows its ugly head and users may or may not look further to the wealth of stuff that actually exists. Not being able to play the games your friends are playing is bad. Dual booting is an imperfect solution, reboots are annoying (especially when you've got other stuff you're working on), and unless Windows is just used as a gaming platform and not really anything else Ubuntu also installed may not get anywhere near the same attention if the user feels it deserves any at all.


6. Yuck, Ugly

Different people have different tastes, and all can be accomodated in linux - except for those things that haven't been implemented yet. RGBA is a big thing and something that I'm waiting on. The Murrine GTK engine implements drawing with it, but the GTK app needs patching or, how things are now being done, GTK must be patched itself. The patch is fine, but the apps still need to be patched to work with it. RGBA is also coming about in QT4 with the Bespin theme engine. It has it as an experimental compile-time option, but I only saw it popular for a little while on the Monthly Desktop Screenshot Thread, afterward it basically faded back into obscurity. Theming engines are being improved to draw better and themes are made to look better and more consistant. There is progress, but there are still things to do. There is also the little problem of the non-native applications and how they can't take advantage of such features and still may look a little odd if themes aren't made to compensate for them. There is a double-standard. Windows programs look and operate differently, but Linux programs are expected to all look consistant.


7. The Benefits of Cross-Platform

Cross-platform applications will give some users some added comfort when migrating to a Linux distribution such as Ubuntu. The familiar Firefox Web Browser is a welcome reminder that Ubuntu is a place that supports regular applications too. The GIMP (the topic of this thread that is somewhat hijacked) is another beautiful example. Inkscape, though not installed by default, Minesweeper even adds some comfort. The easier someone can get acquanted with Ubuntu, the better chance they have at staying. Staying partially on topic with this thread for a moment, such applications - especially Firefox and the GIMP - are applications that some people would know, that show what Ubuntu can do. We have to realize that it isn't the Average Joe we're getting so much, at least right now. It is more of those who are somewhat tech-savvy, know someone who is, or got interested by a few youtube videos or an article on the internet that mentions Linux - even just briefly. These people are more likely to be using Firefox as their main web browser. These people are also somewhat likely to have encountered the GIMP, maybe not have used it more than briefly, but encountering it is good enough. They have probably seen OpenOffice.org shown somewhere, such as an addition with a java download. They have encountered bittorrent programs too, and can figure out Transmission. Them, themselves being able to find their way around and lead themselves to other programs installed is much, much better than having to tell them. It is the difference between having knowledge adn simply having information.


8. The Toll of Cross-Platform

Applications want to have more users, more supporters - more than their competitors. An application that is really good likely will not just stay in Linux. For example, Rosegarden, which is tied to the JACK realtime audio server will be ported to Windows soon after the QT4 port is finished. This is a wonderful thing for the application, but Linux loses one more exclusive thing; one reason gone to use Linux over other operating systems. This leaves two kinds of people to come to Linux: the ignorant and the well-informed. The ignorant may not know of the cross-platform nature of some applications. They may come to Ubuntu because they think that its the only place to use a certain tool, and they may even enjoy their stay. Then there are the well-informed. These people are using Ubuntu or any other Linux distro because it is Linux, because it has the useful infrastructure they want, because of how it is made to integrate applications welll with the system. They want it for the terminal, not despite it.


9. When Will it be Ready?

Short story: It already is, and it may never be.

Long story: It all depends on how much you actually believe in Ubuntu's Bug #1 and how much you think other Linux distros care about it too. It all depends on who you are talking about linux being ready for. Linux is ready for those who want Linux. Linux is actually also ready for those who just want an operating system to check their mail and search some things on the internet. Linux is ready for those new to a computer, young or old. Linux is not ready for the hardcore pc gamers. It won't be until games are really made for Linux or Wine succeeds to the extent that you don't have to check their website before you go to the store to get a new game. Linux is not ready for those really familiar and really comfortable with Windows. It shouldn't have to be for obvious reasons. Linux, as a whole stack of architectures from which applications are built, is changing drastically - not just adding more features and fixing bugs. KMS, DRI2, RGBA, HAL deprecation, the X server doing less and less, Wayland that's being built to try to replace the X server or at least be a better choice in some circumstances, integration of realtime kernel patches into the mainline kernel, DVD playback with menus in Totem, styled subtitles in Totem, the audio stack in flux with PulseAudio forcing fixes and actually helping the stack stop being a sorry lump of crap that you can have work decently by default or spend a lot of time tweaking config files to try to make it work right, a new version of JACK is starting to take over, KDE4, Gnome 3, GTK3, Compiz rewritten in C++, Blender innovating over and over, finding new features that could be implemented by forcing their need (yay open movie projects!), multiseat cleanly implemented, and the list goes on. There is no waiting for the dust to settle. People just keep kicking at the ground. Once some fundamental architecture problems are addressed, once some big changes are made, there is always something else. It might be a harder problem or easier, but it depended on something that's being done or it was a goal that seemed to be nothing but a dream before. This is not Windows where you get a version and stick with it, where the operating system or everything low down enough to call it that isn't changing that much or that noticeably. This is Linux, this is open-source, and mistaking it for anything else is an insult. If it isn't this environment that you want, go back from whence you came if your ideal does not change, but if it is we'll welcome you with open arms and do our best to help you have the best experience you can here.


10. Conclusion

Yes, you're finally here, whether you read this far or skipped. Anyway, I don't believe that Linux is for everyone or even will be. Linux, the set of operating systems known for choice, should ironically strive to be the only choice, but a great one. We've got a moving target we're working towards, and we're not even sure where it is now. If, a decade ago, we had the Ubuntu we have today, we'd definitely be considered a great choice. If even 5 years ago we were where we are now we'd probably be in the running. We weren't, so we have to keep on innovating, to keep going faster. We need more great developers to fuel this move. Products using linux now: netbooks and smartphones which take away the expectations of a fully working computer and as new and popular markets, get to define what it means for Linux to exist. Mac OSX gaining market share also helps, by showing that if you "think different" than what you've been used to, you can still have a great operating system. Linux's position is also partially its own fault. It isn't something we'd describe as "fundamentally flawed" but the philosophical decisions as a whole it has made and how it is distributed prevent MP3 codecs, playback of encrypted DVDs by default, etc. As an operating system people are expected to install themselves rather than having it come preinstalled, these are things that only help keep it down. I used to think that Ubuntu was something that everyone should learn and use, but after a while I saw that I had reasons to, while many other people do not. At least with people seeing my computer, seeing how I've set it up to be exactly how I'd love to use it, they will become more comfortable with Ubuntu and Linux, and maybe ask me to help them install it.

ranch hand
December 28th, 2009, 05:55 PM
@BwackNinja

Great job.

zekopeko
December 28th, 2009, 08:28 PM
@BwackNinja

Perhaps a blog would be better...

BwackNinja
December 30th, 2009, 01:25 AM
@BwackNinja

Great job.

Thank you good sir.


@BwackNinja

Perhaps a blog would be better...

I was planning on doing that if it didn't fit in one post. It is still a giant post.

Scott O'Nanski
December 30th, 2009, 01:33 AM
Gimp can do what PS can and you just have to know how. However its a good move to save space and one can always install it from the repos.


This is something I've recently come to terms with. Aside from the UI handling like a shopping cart with a wonky left wheel, if you take your time you can produce professional quality work in GIMP.

Albeit, there's certain functions that produce crappy results but that's up to the GIMP developers to resolve.

I think they need to get their heads out of certain orifices and admit that Linux NEEDS a photoshop replacement.

Scott O'Nanski
December 30th, 2009, 01:36 AM
IMHO gimp lacks a whole menu of PS features:
layer blending options (i.e what i remember for now>>)


inner glow
outer glow
drop shadow
emboss
inner shadow
stroke ( i don't know how to apply border in GIMP, if i apply border it gets applied for the whole page rather than for the layer)


this is only a few from one menu though i don't know if there is an alternate way to achieve those effects in gimp.

Those are easy to reproduce - and before styles came alone in PS it was simply a matter of using Gaussian blur on various layers. Embossing/Beveling is accomplished using Gaussian blurs, levels and alpha channel bumping.

The stroke issue in GIMP is a drawback for me because it always looks pixelated, and raggy.

Scott O'Nanski
December 30th, 2009, 01:46 AM
Personally, this is my philosophy;

Ubuntu needs to showcase the BEST that FOSS has to offer. If it's simply a matter of "one click installtion" then include professional quality apps and ditch the useless ones like Open Office Draw. lol


Applications, such as the default games, also suck. Lose them.

hang-time
January 1st, 2010, 04:14 AM
While I am new to Linux, I am familiar Gimp. I like Gimp - and I agree that it should be left out of the distribution.

In addition to Gimp, I also use CS3 and Corel X4 on my Win machine (academic prices). Neither of these programs came with the OS and they would, like Gimp, tend to frustrate the average user. A simple cropping, sizing, and thumb-nailing program like Microsoft Office Picture Manager or even Adobe's Photoshop Elements is really what most people want.

GIMP would, in my opinion, be doing themselves a favor if the created Gimp light. They would get the name recognition from an easy to use, free package. They would have less support problems, and take up less space in a distribution. People with additional requirements could download the full package for free or a small charge. It really would be a win-win situation.

Were M$ to offer a full blown image editing package as complex as GIMP or PS my advice would be exactly the same to them.

NawafLol
January 1st, 2010, 12:42 PM
I think its a good idea leaving out GIMP !

Mostly because most people i know (who installed ubuntu ) not using GIMP !

Although i use GIMP ... i think i could be happy with just downloading it over the Software Channel !

6205
January 1st, 2010, 05:03 PM
IMO Ubuntu is trying to be easy to use, consumer oriented OS, so removing GIMP, which is professional graphics editor, seems to me logical. It looks like also XSane will be replaced with Simple Scan, also maybe some backup tool like Deja Dup will be added and only obsolete Rhythmbox persists...(Banshee is much better)

IMO it was also good choice to remove OOo Base, but there is also Math, which is unnecessary...

But when they are agumenting with limited CD space, that is IMO BS...

They could long time ago remove all those xserver-xorg very obsolete VGA drivers. They could dump all those asian/indic specific fonts(which could be downloaded with language packs durring install). They should also dump unecessary stuff like Braile support(how many blind people ale using Ubuntu? I am sure than none)

They could simply dump milion other things(i personally after clean install remove cca 270MB of junk) in flavor of GIMP, so removing GIMP if it will happen, will be not due CD space problems, but it will be only some dumb policy, nothing else...

Dragonbite
January 2nd, 2010, 02:57 PM
I'll be happy so long as I can get the all-in-one-window view of Gimp available in the next release! An article showed it and it looks a lot easier to handle, more Photoshop-like!

That is, providing it works alright on the smaller screens of my laptops and does not overrun the OK button off the bottom of the screen like some Gnome applications (Evolution) did. Thankfully they seem fixed.

phillw
January 2nd, 2010, 09:53 PM
Having just re-aquainted my self with GIMP (I don't do graphic design !!!)

Please don't change it - It can auto-correct photo's for me, it will scale them for the web-site, it'll spit them out in differing formats, resolutions etc. Heck, it'll even suck in a pdf & allow me to edit it (I paid good money to adobe for such a programme for the Mac a few years back). I can add engineering dimensional arrow headed lines on it.

What do you all want ??!!!!

Those that use all the parts of Photoshop Professional may complain that is doesn't do everything just like it does ... Fine - go buy Photoshop Professional & and Operating System (And upgraded hardware i.e. processor, RAM etc) to run it on. I had a trial version of Pro -- FAR to complicated for us minions. So, just get used to it - GIMP is not Photoshop it is not a wannabe - It is, instead, a very powerful Graphical Image Manipulation Programme - With lots of "Auto This" and "Auto that" - and is does a really good job of it. It is certainly as powerful, if not more than, Photoshop ME - that the average user, who wants something more than "reduce red-eye" (Which the units in my local ASDA (UK Walmart) store can do).

I take my hat off to the developers of GIMP & hope that it continues to be shipped, so those of us who want a little more than F-Spot does, have that ability.

Oh, and all the images here, have been run through GIMP --> http://fulltext.phillw.net/ It's a linked site to my tutorial on the use of FULLTEXT searching within MySQL. Most of the pages are dummys, as it is there to let people use the "Find a Part" and see how it puts the MySQL query together TS400, OIL, KEYS, TS410, DPC6400 / 6410 and some others, like Flexible rubber mountings are alive on that site - It links to another WIP, the main site which I'm still finishing off .

Using the fulltext entry method keeps the google-bot off it - that blooming thing is starting to haunt me - And to think people pay good money to have one of them things hovering :lolflag:

/edit -- there it goes agin -- pdf --> GIMP, edit, spit out as jpg .... Just for the ability to import, edit and export pdf's it is worth it's space on the cd.

Phill.

kman57
January 3rd, 2010, 01:01 AM
Huge mistake not to include Gimp. Ive been using for 4 years now and love it and know how to get it if its not included. But someone new to linux wont even know what a Gimp program is unless all the best apps are included in the OS. Gimp is one of the best apps Linux has to offer.

Eclipse.
January 3rd, 2010, 01:23 AM
Ubuntu developers agree, GIMP developers agree.

Thats good enough for me.

oldsoundguy
January 3rd, 2010, 08:00 PM
What this allows (for those that have not figured it out yet) is that there is now an opening on the live/install disk for a more bare bones and easier to use for a newbie photo processing program. And it gives the Gimp developers an open door to make their program as big (meaning lots more bells and whistles) as they need to (within reason).

The true BLOAT in Photo Shop is the crap that comes up at load up giving credit from the head developer to the guy that cleans the bathrooms. And their "pop ups". (plus the thing phones home for an update every time it is launched .. that eats up launch time.)(I STILL run Adobe on an XP machine that sits in the corner and never goes surfing!)
Do NOT think you will see that type of bloat with Gimp and that will be their BIG point down the road. (But it WILL get bigger as features are added)
Just as long as it is in the repositories, it really makes no difference if it is on the install or live disk. MOST who test drive the live disk do just that, TEST DRIVE it. Now if you are relying on a flash for your Linux, INSTALL THE PROGRAM to the flash drive .. not copy the live. Then you can add to it (including other items).

Just remember there is no ADOBE that comes with Windows (if ya want it ya pay for it through the nose!) and be glad that there is Gimp. Which, if ya want it ya install it!

BwackNinja
January 3rd, 2010, 08:49 PM
What this allows (for those that have not figured it out yet) is that there is now an opening on the live/install disk for a more bare bones and easier to use for a newbie photo processing program. And it gives the Gimp developers an open door to make their program as big (meaning lots more bells and whistles) as they need to (within reason).

The true BLOAT in Photo Shop is the crap that comes up at load up giving credit from the head developer to the guy that cleans the bathrooms. And their "pop ups". (plus the thing phones home for an update every time it is launched .. that eats up launch time.)(I STILL run Adobe on an XP machine that sits in the corner and never goes surfing!)
Do NOT think you will see that type of bloat with Gimp and that will be their BIG point down the road. (But it WILL get bigger as features are added)
Just as long as it is in the repositories, it really makes no difference if it is on the install or live disk. MOST who test drive the live disk do just that, TEST DRIVE it. Now if you are relying on a flash for your Linux, INSTALL THE PROGRAM to the flash drive .. not copy the live. Then you can add to it (including other items).

Just remember there is no ADOBE that comes with Windows (if ya want it ya pay for it through the nose!) and be glad that there is Gimp. Which, if ya want it ya install it!

No "new" program is being added. Basic photo editing stuff is being added to f-spot. The GIMP by no means lives within the confines of Ubuntu, it is constantly having features added with a major one recently being GEGL integration that is still in progress. Photoshop not being default on Windows (not that it could be) is no reason for the GIMP not to be there by default in a linux distro.

Dragonbite
January 4th, 2010, 04:10 AM
No "new" program is being added. Basic photo editing stuff is being added to f-spot. The GIMP by no means lives within the confines of Ubuntu,

Yup. I doubt Fedora will drop Gimp, they won't have F-Spot in the list of default apps on their LiveCD (otherwise, if you can just use the DVD and install what you want).

Murdoc_of_puts
January 4th, 2010, 05:29 AM
Well, I just found out about the Ubuntu Studio, Which is exactly what I was talking about earlier. Which is a media heavy-audio,picture,video editing and creating-form of Ubuntu, as in it just comes with packages that the normal distro does not(includes GIMP). Out of the gate. So I think they should take it out. Along with alot of other (which are not that good anyway) programs. But when your installing it, I think it would be nice if they Told you of the other associated Distros. For example in the splash screens that pop up when you load it. Or if they added things that it wasn't installing on your computer, and told you what they did and how to get them. Because the sooner you learn how to use the repos the better. I'm saying to put it there because The main thing that everyone seems to be concerned about is the people who are new to linux/Ubuntu, who wouldn't know to look in the repos for one of the best photo editing programs out there.

mkoehler
January 4th, 2010, 07:42 AM
There's lots of legitimate discussion going on in this post. Personally, I don't feel as though ubuntu should drop gimp from the basic installation. The reason is this: Applications that I will merely delete in favor of a replacement should not be included in the base install. For example, F-spot is of no use to me; I simply removed it then installed picasa for linux. On the other hand, I'm not going to delete Gimp in favor of another photo editing application. Even though I'm not a frequent user of the program, it still has provided useful over the years. Not to mention that people who are new to linux (and unfamiliar with the popular applications) might not stagger upon at first when looking for a new 2-d graphics application.

kaitwospirit
January 4th, 2010, 09:05 AM
There's lots of legitimate discussion going on in this post. Personally, I don't feel as though ubuntu should drop gimp from the basic installation. The reason is this: Applications that I will merely delete in favor of a replacement should not be included in the base install. For example, F-spot is of no use to me; I simply removed it then installed picasa for linux. On the other hand, I'm not going to delete Gimp in favor of another photo editing application. Even though I'm not a frequent user of the program, it still has provided useful over the years. Not to mention that people who are new to linux (and unfamiliar with the popular applications) might not stagger upon at first when looking for a new 2-d graphics application.

...so we shouldn't install any IM client by default at all, because some people will remove empathy because they hate it and install pidgin instead, and other people prefer empathy to pidgin and, if pidgin becomes default again, will remove pidgin and install empathy instead?

Also, I'd argue that as the Ubuntu Software Center develops, it will make applications a lot more "discoverable" and those who would want to use the GIMP will be able to learn it exists quite easily.

chessnerd
January 4th, 2010, 09:10 AM
The GIMP is a great example of the power of open-source software, there is no doubt of that, but it is too technical for the average user (myself included in that set). A lighter, simpler paint program would be good enough for the default and the GIMP can be added via the Software Center.

Johnsie
January 4th, 2010, 12:14 PM
Good call. GIMP sucks. It may have alot of functionality, but what good is that functionality without a decent interface? To me it looks like a graphics program that was designed by coders rather than designers.

I hate it when people call GIMP a 'Photoshop Equivalent'. Using the word 'equivalent' is completely misleading because it is nowhere near equivalent to Photoshop. I would suggest that Linux users quit using that word to describe products which are completely inferior. Alternative yes, equivalent no.

Dragonbite
January 4th, 2010, 02:41 PM
I'm still fooling around with F-Spot in 9.10, but it looks like it has the option to display the edited version or the original version which leads me to think it isn't destroying the original. At least not until you save it or tell it to?

I do like the way the pictures imported into F-spot go into a /Photo directory under the /Pictures directory. I have a number of graphics I like to save, so I can put that in the /Pictures level and only imported photos go into the /Photo directory. Still not too keen on the /Photo/yyyy/dd/mm structure, but there are some improvements with F-spot.

Anybody else have any actual experience with the latest F-spot?

BwackNinja
January 5th, 2010, 02:00 AM
Good call. GIMP sucks. It may have alot of functionality, but what good is that functionality without a decent interface? To me it looks like a graphics program that was designed by coders rather than designers.

I hate it when people call GIMP a 'Photoshop Equivalent'. Using the word 'equivalent' is completely misleading because it is nowhere near equivalent to Photoshop. I would suggest that Linux users quit using that word to describe products which are completely inferior. Alternative yes, equivalent no.

I may be biased because I fall under the category of 'coder', but I think the GIMP interface is great. It does good job of showing most of the features used in the GIMP to be able to use them. Hiding the features hides the power. A 'simple' interface (which is what a lot of people say when they mean "stop showing me things I don't know yet") by default would be IMHO the worst decision that could possibly be made by the GIMP developers. A single-window interface on the other hand isn't so bad, though I might just stick with the multi-window one.

ranch hand
January 5th, 2010, 02:09 AM
i may be biased because i fall under the category of 'coder', but i think the gimp interface is great. It does good job of showing most of the features used in the gimp to be able to use them. Hiding the features hides the power. A 'simple' interface (which is what a lot of people say when they mean "stop showing me things i don't know yet") by default would be imho the worst decision that could possibly be made by the gimp developers. A single-window interface on the other hand isn't so bad, though i might just stick with the multi-window one.
+1

Glenn nl
January 5th, 2010, 06:56 PM
Why not replace F-spot with Gthumb and Tomboy with Gnote and then remove Mono?
That will save about 100 mb and we can bring back gimp.

dmagick
January 5th, 2010, 07:05 PM
I don't really see what good sacrificing GIMP will do.

The reasons as some have presented appear valid, but frankly, I don't want to have to hunt for GIMP or remember to chase it down in godless repoz wasteland. Many of the core libs and such that GIMP uses are also cross-attached into other packages as well.

I like it where it is. It is to modern Linux what XV and Seyon were when I first got into Linux (Slack, 1994).

Leave it. Go find something cutesy to kill off.

Merk42
January 5th, 2010, 07:10 PM
Why not replace F-spot with Gthumb and Tomboy with Gnote and then remove Mono?
That will save about 100 mb and we can bring back gimp.
Because GIMP wasn't removed due to lack of space and Lucid+1 may replace Rhytmbox with Banshee which depends on Mono.



to chase it down in godless repoz wasteland. Many of the core libs and such that GIMP uses are also cross-attached into other packages as well.

Have you used Ubuntu Software Center or even Add/Remove?
You really think installing any application is that difficult?

ranch hand
January 5th, 2010, 10:50 PM
Have you used Ubuntu Software Center or even Add/Remove?
You really think installing any application is that difficult?

Or synaptic, which is, of coarse, hard to use. Enter gimp in "search". Click on gimp and mark for installation. Click on apply. Sit back for a couple minutes and then you ca ngo to usig gimp.

I do not like them removing the sucker at all from the CD. Acting like it is hard to install is just silly.

"sudo apt-get install gimp" works in your terminal very well too.

gabo.cr
January 6th, 2010, 02:13 AM
I may be wrong, but there are two types of people.

1- People who use Terminal must of the time, reporting bugs and creating programs.

2- People who don't know how Ubuntu works, but they are really good creating drawings, movies, pictures, etc.

The first group may not see the need for Gimp, the second group will try to stay away from Terminal.
Of course, there are people on both sides, but I don't think we should remove Gimp unless we find another program that it is not so big, that is the biggest concern on this post I guess.

Merk42
January 6th, 2010, 03:10 AM
I may be wrong, but there are two types of people.

1- People who use Terminal must of the time, reporting bugs and creating programs.

2- People who don't know how Ubuntu works, but they are really good creating drawings, movies, pictures, etc.

The first group may not see the need for Gimp, the second group will try to stay away from Terminal.
Of course, there are people on both sides, but I don't think we should remove Gimp unless we find another program that it is not so big, that is the biggest concern on this post I guess.
:confused:

So if you like creating drawing, movies, picture, etc you're too inept to even use Ubuntu Software Center?
As an artist (who doesn't by the way use the terminal nor create programs) I'm offended.

ranch hand
January 6th, 2010, 04:00 AM
Geeze Merk42 I really do hate having to agree with you. Getting apps for Ubuntu is just really not tough.

I really am a ranch hand, I am not a coder and not much of an artist. I can, however, find apps in Ubuntu quite easily and even install them. It is not a real challenge to click a mouse button a couple of times. Even I can do it.

To say that there are users that can't do it is not only insulting, it is pretty silly. If they can't do that they (who ever these poor folks are) better stay away from driving and using computers as they would only be a danger to them selves and those around them.

gabo.cr
January 6th, 2010, 04:56 AM
Merk42, I never used the word inept.
I'm not trying to make fun of anybody.
What I'm saying is that the Ubuntu community has different types of people and we cannot just eliminate a program that easy.
I'm sure that if we post this Poll under the Art and Design Section of this forum most of the people would try to keep Gimp, and I agree with that.

I apologize for any misunderstandings.

Edit: When I said "People who don't know how Ubuntu works" I mean the system itself, not the GUI features.

Lepodo
January 6th, 2010, 02:01 PM
I believe that there is a vast majority of people who have installed Ubuntu and use it just for daily stuff, like GIMP. I have a relative who has Ubuntu and no internet. He recently said to me while we were talking about linux at how much we liked the suite of applications that just came as it is with the disk. I voted to get rid of it and people can get it themselves from the software center because as people have said. Most people might crop and image or two in it, but there probably isn't a strong enough community of hard graphic designers that do all their work in GIMP in Ubuntu.

meborc
January 6th, 2010, 02:37 PM
if you want more programs... order the DVD

i use gimp regularly and i think removing it from the main install is a good idea... we need to include more drivers, more stuff that actually matters when you first install your system... gimp can be easily added with just a few clicks and a password

if you don't have internet, get the DVD version

ranch hand
January 6th, 2010, 02:42 PM
I am not a "hard graphics designer at all. I use gimp, if not everyday, several times a week.

I modified "cosmos" (screen saver) the other day by just adding an image on top of the existing ones. This is a simple scale, copy, paste operation that you are not going to do with another app that I know of. It was a lot of FUN.

Removing gimp from the CD is going to make it tough on folks with dial up and no connection. On the dial up connection I had until recently the down load of gimp and gimp-data would be in the range of 35 to 45 minutes and that was not as slow a connection as a lot of folks have. It was also very stable which is also not universal.

It is a dirty shame that it is going.

BLTicklemonster
January 6th, 2010, 02:54 PM
Okay, this isn't the gimp vs photoshop thread. I have one of those going elsewhere.

This is the :

"we're going to remove a great tool from the toolbox to make room for crap" thread.

Yes, show us how smart you are and remove gimp, please.

Not.

ronacc
January 6th, 2010, 03:03 PM
if you want more programs... order the DVD

i use gimp regularly and i think removing it from the main install is a good idea... we need to include more drivers, more stuff that actually matters when you first install your system... gimp can be easily added with just a few clicks and a password

if you don't have internet, get the DVD version

fine except that the people that don't have a fast reliable connection are very likely to be poor or 3rd world users and shipit doesn't provide dvd's only cd's, and aren't they one of the "target audiences" of Ubuntu ?

ranch hand
January 6th, 2010, 03:16 PM
fine except that the people that don't have a fast reliable connection are very likely to be poor or 3rd world users and shipit doesn't provide dvd's only cd's, and aren't they one of the "target audiences" of Ubuntu ?
This is the point.

Gimp is not really a crucial app for your computer, I will grant that. It is an app that makes computing fun.

Because of that it makes Ubuntu more attractive than a pirated version of a commercial OS.

You do not have to be exceptionally poor or in a 3rd world nation to be on dial up. I have, for years, considered getting the commercial, popular photo manipulator. I have never been able to justify the cost. I could have gotten a pirated copy for free a couple times. I have a problem with that concept, it just is not right, so I didn't.

Gimp on the LiveCD that I purchased (faster than shipit and I think less than 5 bucks with shipping) was the main thing that tipped the balance in favor of Ubuntu. I did not even know if I could use it.

Keith_Beef
January 6th, 2010, 03:21 PM
IMHO gimp lacks a whole menu of PS features:
layer blending options (i.e what i remember for now>>)


inner glow
outer glow
drop shadow
emboss
inner shadow
stroke ( i don't know how to apply border in GIMP, if i apply border it gets applied for the whole page rather than for the layer)


this is only a few from one menu though i don't know if there is an alternate way to achieve those effects in gimp.


I don't know what "inner glow", "outer glow" or "inner shadow" are.

Drop shadow is in Filters -> Light and Shadow -> Drop Shadow.

What you call "emboss" might be "Bump Map". This is in Filters -> Map -> Bump Map.

For stroke, you can use the Path tool (icon looks like a fountain pen in the toolbox): draw your bezier curve path, then in the Layers, Paths Selection dialog go to the Paths tab. Now click with MB3 on the path and from the contextual menu select Stroke Path... You'll see a dialog where you can choose a line width, a brush, either the current foreground colour or a pattern.


Moving from Photoshop to Gimp is like changing to a new car. Many of the controls are in the same place, but a few controls are not where you are used to finding them.

I remember once spending fifteen minutes with the owner's handbook, trying to open the fuel cap on a Renault 19...

K.

ranch hand
January 6th, 2010, 03:39 PM
There are also a lot of add on tools in the form of scripts that add functionality to gimp. I do not use them currently as I am trying to learn to use what is there but I know that most of what PS will do is available.

PS is not an option for me at all, I will not have MS crap on my box. I do not care if it works in wine, what part of no MS crap do you not understand?

If the PS folks want to come out with a cross platform version I would consider it but not very seriously. If you are handy at that type of thing you can write your own scripts to get gimp to do things you want. This is my main motivation for wanting to learn to write scripts.

This seems to me to be part of the core of Linux. Give people the tools and education to run their own box. I like it.

JackRock
January 6th, 2010, 04:29 PM
PS is not an option for me at all, I will not have MS crap on my box. I do not care if it works in wine, what part of no MS crap do you not understand?

Probably the part that PS is Adobe, not Microsoft.

But the point is taken. I refuse to go to their suite now, and am trying to use open source as much as possible these days.

drekker001
January 6th, 2010, 04:49 PM
I see it this way, in my country (Brazil), our broadband connection is slow (1Mbps) and expensive (US$ 70 to 80 months) and most of the population earns US$ 250 a month (most of them use dial-up ). With this scenario, the removal of the Gimp is better to do the download.

mcduck
January 6th, 2010, 05:04 PM
OpenOffice uses a lot of space as well, and majority of users never touch more than couple of percent of it's features. Shouldn't it then be replaces with AbiWord & Gnumeric or does this logic only apply to image editors and not to other applications?

I've always seen having a real image editor, suitable for even professional use, by default as a great advantage over other operating systems which only provide editors that can handle couple of most basic tasks and do even them quite badly.

Still, I'm not stopping using Ubuntu or anything like that, Gimp is easy to install and I need to install a lot of other stuff after installing Ubuntu so it doesn't mean any extra work. I'm just sightly disappointed, and have some doubts over the strategy of building the default install for beginners only. Providing some stuff for more advanced users as well might not be a completely stupid idea, not even when those users can install the apps themselves. Besides, person who's more advanced with graphics applications might not be advanced Linux/Ubuntu user and would still have troubles finding and installing the tools he needs.

maybeway36
January 6th, 2010, 05:11 PM
I love the Path tool. I made my avatar with it.

zekopeko
January 6th, 2010, 06:35 PM
This seems to me to be part of the core of Linux. Give people the tools and education to run their own box. I like it.

Then you missed the whole point of Linux. Your scenario is a subset of the greater "Make it do whatever you want".

Once Ubuntu becomes sufficiently user-friendly that misconception will hopefully die. Then you can move to another OS that isn't user-friendly and start the "argument" all over again.

ranch hand
January 6th, 2010, 07:37 PM
Then you missed the whole point of Linux. Your scenario is a subset of the greater "Make it do whatever you want".

Once Ubuntu becomes sufficiently user-friendly that misconception will hopefully die. Then you can move to another OS that isn't user-friendly and start the "argument" all over again.
Here, I think, is the basic disagreement between us; I do not see, in any way, that Linux, in general, and particularly Ubuntu is user unfriendly.

I started with computers with MSdos (with DosShell) and I switched from Vista to Ubuntu. I admit that I had to learn some things and still do. I had to do that with MS on every different release.

The "friendly" part of Ubuntu is about as slick as I can see a computer being. MS on the other hand was always a pain in the posterior.

I have never even seen a Mac so I don't know a thing about it (I should probably start a blog as an Apple expert - ignorance seems to be the qualifier).

zekopeko
January 6th, 2010, 08:43 PM
Here, I think, is the basic disagreement between us; I do not see, in any way, that Linux, in general, and particularly Ubuntu is user unfriendly.

I started with computers with MSdos (with DosShell) and I switched from Vista to Ubuntu. I admit that I had to learn some things and still do. I had to do that with MS on every different release.

The "friendly" part of Ubuntu is about as slick as I can see a computer being. MS on the other hand was always a pain in the posterior.

I have never even seen a Mac so I don't know a thing about it (I should probably start a blog as an Apple expert - ignorance seems to be the qualifier).

My point is that you are willing to learn. But my problem is that for basic operations you shouldn't have to.
Which is the greater genius: having something so intuitive and logical that you can get the hang of it with a little poking or something that forces you to spend an hour reading tutorials and you still don't know what exactly you are doing?

You believe that people should learn to use their OS and understand what exactly is happening under the hood. I don't. Nobody is expecting car drivers to know every nuance of a modern combustion engine but some people here are expecting users to learn every crevice of Ubuntu before using it.
And then when Ubuntu tries to simplify and streamline the experience those same people cry "Ubuntu is being dumbed down".

And if you want to see a slick OS try Mac OS X. I had limited exposure to it but as far as slick goes it wins gold. What really nailed it for me is a little anecdote. My friend who is your average computer user as they get had no problem using Mac OS X 10.4, while he had the problem with WinXP. They don't have radically different concepts but OSX has a far better presentation of those concepts.

So when Ubuntu Software Center and removal of GIMP try to better presentations of those concepts please consider other people and how this will improve their Ubuntu experience. Just as I don't use OpenOffice and still understand why it's on the CD.

Pipps
January 6th, 2010, 09:04 PM
I am a reasonably proficient photoshop user.

I prefer to use Photoshop in Wine, than try to use the seemingly unfathomable ways of Gimp.

Let it go!

phillw
January 6th, 2010, 09:22 PM
I prefer to use Photoshop in Wine, than try to use the seemingly unfathomable ways of Gimp.


So, I have to pay for Win, just to do photo-editing .... ermmmmm, nope :D
As to the joys of putting on a full set of spyware and anti-virus .... I'll pass on that one, also !!

But, for those stuck with photo-shop (I know some schools / colleges are for their courses) the WINE gang have it up to about CS4 - Just in time for Adobe to discontinue the free version.
(Keeping mouth shut on that decision - no politics ;) !!)

Regards,

Phill.

Merk42
January 6th, 2010, 09:33 PM
So, I have to pay for Win, just to do photo-editing .... ermmmmm, nope :D
As to the joys of putting on a full set of spyware and anti-virus .... I'll pass on that one, also !!

Do you have any idea how WINE works?

ogromano
January 6th, 2010, 10:51 PM
Hello all,

There are a couple of things that have been taken for granted or just alluded to without actual reference in this thread so I'll start with that before stating my opinion:

1. LiveCD and reasons for using it:

It is a good way to demo Ubuntu without making changes to a machine.


checking the hardware works as expected
seeing if you like the look & feel of the distro
preparing yourself and your unique hardware if required
repair tasks
'showing off' Ubuntu to people on their own machine.

2. GIMP (GNU Image Manipulation Program):

It is a freely distributed program for such tasks as photo retouching, image composition and image authoring. 3. F-Spot:

A full-featured (http://f-spot.org/Features) personal photo management application that simplifies digital photography by providing intuitive tools to help you share, touch-up, find and organize your images.
First of all, I am a new user to Linux and Ubuntu... I had always thought that Linux was something my brainy older brother used in order to keep me out of his computer!! It wasn't until a year ago that my brother popped the LiveCD in my laptop and showed me around.
I believe that without a deeper interest in computers and IT or someone to show you the ropes there is really little chance (but not impossible) of an average point-and-click (i.e. a basic user) user deciding one day to change OS and getting the LiveCD to even look at it. For this particular reason alone, the LiveCD should include applications that are both impressive and reminiscent of what that user might recognize or might have used in his/her OS. I doubt many basic users have ever used Photoshop, but I bet you that most of them know about it and how expensive it probably is and to see it there, al ready set to go might be a great selling point. At least it was for me. I've tried Photoshop before and found it difficult and since I couldn't afford it, never really cared too much for it. Now I am a GIMP fan... and by extension an Ubuntu fan, which is the point of the LiveCD if I'm not mistaken... show how good it is off the bat so that people don't just say... "well... I have the same thing in Windows or in Mac... so why should I change?"

From the quotes above it is completely obvious that GIMP and F-spot (which I dislike a lot in its current form) are not on the same level... it is like saying that Photoshop and Photoshop Elements are in the same league. But it is true that if you have never given a thought about creating/manipulating images, then you wouldn't get PS or GIMP and probably F-spot or PS Elements would be enough... but neither PS nor GIMP will ever organize images nor will the other ones create or manipulate to the extent of these two.

So in reality, to "show-off" Ubuntu to a basic user you actually would need both on the CD... now I know this might garner me many post-whippings.. so believe me when I say I don't think that it is the best solution either.

A more plausible solution could be having demonstrations of what these kinds of programs can do once installed... I'm sure there are other great apps that could be used to impress the non-believers but that are too big for the CD... or maybe instead of putting a 100 mb movie with all the demos, for the ones who might have internet, links to a nice site with examples of desktops running such apps.

So following the reasons for the LiveCD, it has to impress, repair and prepare the installation. Not having GIMP would diminish one of these purposes. There must be other ways to keep the total size down without losing this tool to hook people with.

Hope this wasn't too long. :)

BwackNinja
January 6th, 2010, 11:46 PM
^- @ogramano

beat you on length of a post a few pages ago :P

and I agree with everything you're saying, but you're missing what ronacc and ranch hand are saying. It's not only that its slightly less accessible for us, nor accessible off of the livecd (without installing it of course) to show off. It's also much less accessible or near inaccessible for others who don't have the wonders of fast internet or internet at all. Videos online showcasing installable programs are great, but the audiences it can't reach are the audiences that are still hurt by the change regardless and the most important in this consideration.

kaitwospirit
January 7th, 2010, 01:07 AM
Those who don't have fast internet connections, or internet at all, are always going to be lacking something they might want to use. We currently don't ship WINE on the LiveCD, for example, and I would say that WINE would be a great tool for someone with no internet connection to have because it would allow them to buy some software and games from stores (in which I have never seen software made for Ubuntu) rather than simply not having access to tools at all because they can't download them... and there's a long list of things that Ubuntu does not come with by default. However, there is no one arguing to put WINE on the liveCD for these reasons.

The sad truth is that the liveCD will always lack a tool that someone may think of as essential, whether the GIMP is present on it or not. It doesn't contain the programs needed for compilation, which sucks for programmers with no internet access. It doesn't contain the full OpenOffice suite, which sucks for users who need the missing components. It only contains a few, simple games, which sucks for someone without an internet connection who might want to use their Ubuntu system for gaming (and there are plenty of really awesome games in the repositories). Including the GIMP on the liveCD again won't fix this at all.

zekopeko
January 7th, 2010, 02:04 AM
^- @ogramano

beat you on length of a post a few pages ago :P

and I agree with everything you're saying, but you're missing what ronacc and ranch hand are saying. It's not only that its slightly less accessible for us, nor accessible off of the livecd (without installing it of course) to show off. It's also much less accessible or near inaccessible for others who don't have the wonders of fast internet or internet at all. Videos online showcasing installable programs are great, but the audiences it can't reach are the audiences that are still hurt by the change regardless and the most important in this consideration.

You are in the minority of users. If somebody needs more software and has a crappy internet connection they can buy the DVD online. Those that have no internet connection can even get Ubuntu so that point is moot.

dyslexia
January 7th, 2010, 02:17 AM
Probably Gimp (like linux, actually) is too complex to be used to "hook" new users....

....if it were my show, I would keep Gimp and replace Rhythm box with xmms...

...agree totally about f-spot.... find a simpler, clear cut app that allows image fixing and doesn't try to "import" everything

but that's just me... I hate the complex-retentive apps (i-tunes, iPhoto, etc)

Ibidem
January 7th, 2010, 03:20 AM
There are people with neither DVD drive nor internet connection (except sometimes dialup...).
A relative of a friend is in that situation, and has been wanting to use Linux, specifically some distro with the GIMP.

Does that clarify anything?

As far as claims "they can't get Ubuntu", the local computer store is selling CDs for $5 here, and a cd is free for the asking from Canonical.
I would like to request that if such things must go, they be put into an "extras" cd (preferably shipped with the free cd...).

Of course, I don't anticipate my favorite stuff getting on CD anytime soon.

Thanks,
Ibidem

nanotube
January 7th, 2010, 05:33 AM
My point is that you are willing to learn. But my problem is that for basic operations you shouldn't have to.
Which is the greater genius: having something so intuitive and logical that you can get the hang of it with a little poking or something that forces you to spend an hour reading tutorials and you still don't know what exactly you are doing?

You believe that people should learn to use their OS and understand what exactly is happening under the hood. I don't. Nobody is expecting car drivers to know every nuance of a modern combustion engine but some people here are expecting users to learn every crevice of Ubuntu before using it.

nothing is so intuitive that it takes no effort to learn. (even using your own limbs only became intuitive after years of practice) remember that driving test you had to pass before they'd give you a license? if you want to equate operating a computer with operating a car, then people /should/ be not only learning stuff, but passing a test before being allowed to operate it.

not that bad an idea, either - probably would reduce the sheer amount of incompetence out there, and trim down quite a few botnets, to boot.

nanotube
January 7th, 2010, 05:34 AM
i may be biased because i fall under the category of 'coder', but i think the gimp interface is great. It does good job of showing most of the features used in the gimp to be able to use them. Hiding the features hides the power. A 'simple' interface (which is what a lot of people say when they mean "stop showing me things i don't know yet") by default would be imho the worst decision that could possibly be made by the gimp developers. A single-window interface on the other hand isn't so bad, though i might just stick with the multi-window one.

+1

+2!

nanotube
January 7th, 2010, 05:35 AM
Why not replace F-spot with Gthumb and Tomboy with Gnote and then remove Mono?
That will save about 100 mb and we can bring back gimp.

+100 to that idea from me.

nanotube
January 7th, 2010, 05:36 AM
Because GIMP wasn't removed due to lack of space and Lucid+1 may replace Rhytmbox with Banshee which depends on Mono.


well, that's just one more reason they shouldn't replace rhythmbox with banshee, now, isn't it? :P

Merk42
January 7th, 2010, 05:44 AM
well, that's just one more reason they shouldn't replace rhythmbox with banshee, now, isn't it? :P

Considering Canonical has stated that they don't see Mono as a problem and I don't want to turn this thread into a Mono thread, no it really doesn't provide a reason.

jethro10
January 7th, 2010, 12:38 PM
this is only a few from one menu though i don't know if there is an alternate way to achieve those effects in gimp.

So everything you have said is meaningless? as you admit you have no idea?

I dont use either PS or Gimp but it seems gimp is the most powerful linux has to offer and is good enough to be used professionally even if it lacks some PS features.
However you havn't really helped isolate these here have you? and this wasn't the meaning of the thread anyhow.

Anyhow, my take is it's fine to remove it as it's only a click away if I want it.

Jeff

mcduck
January 7th, 2010, 08:26 PM
Probably Gimp (like linux, actually) is too complex to be used to "hook" new users....

That is only true if one assumes that new Ubuntu user equals new computer user.

But perhaps a person can be new to Ubuntu while still having used computers and different types of software before. In that case this change would only attract some possible new users while at the same time repelling (or at least attracting less than before) other possible new users.

So I must assume that the change isn't really about hooking new users, it's about hooking new users who aren't familiar with computers. Perhaps it would mke sense to try to attract both types of users.. ;)

(Actually, almost every person who I've introduced to Ubuntu has mentioned how great it was to have a real, usable image editor out-of-the-box. Most of them even compared this to windows/OSX which only include programs suitable for most basic home use..)

Well, there's always Ubuntu Studio which includes stuff that attracts more professional computer users. Hopefully they'll manage to release in a decent time after official Ubuntu releases in the future and skipping a release was just a once-only situation.

ogromano
January 7th, 2010, 09:23 PM
That is only true if one assumes that new Ubuntu user equals new computer user.

But perhaps a person can be new to Ubuntu while still having used computers and different types of software before. In that case this change would only attract some possible new users while at the same time repelling (or at least attracting less than before) other possible new users.

So I must assume that the change isn't really about hooking new users, it's about hooking new users who aren't familiar with computers. Perhaps it would mke sense to try to attract both types of users.. ;)

(Actually, almost every person who I've introduced to Ubuntu has mentioned how great it was to have a real, usable image editor out-of-the-box. Most of them even compared this to windows/OSX which only include programs suitable for most basic home use..)
...


I'm definitely not new to computers, but I can tell you straight away that one of the biggest things that attracted me to Ubuntu while viewing the LiveCD and trying Wubi, was the fact that there actually where full applications such as GIMP that A.You don't have to pay for and B. Are all ready to use from the get-go!
If instead I had just seen the the equivalent to M$Paint, I would've not been impressed and I would have thought it a pain that there wasn't really anything else to hook me other than the philosophy of the OS.
Stepping away from paying OSs' is a big selling point for someone that is well-versed enough to know that there are alternatives, but again, if no one points the way or you have no idea, nor interest, you will not bother with Linux and even less for its geeky, terminal-or-die reputation!
This is exactly the point with having such apps like GIMP on the LiveCD to give Ubuntu an air of familiarity with the other OSs' out there and thus allows the future noobs (like myself) to switch and try something different than the square ugly box they live in.

Merk42
January 7th, 2010, 09:30 PM
*HYPOTHETICAL*

I was going to use Ubuntu/Linux but didn't since on the LiveCD I didn't see the following
Photo Organizer
Video Editor
Accounting Software
WINE
See how silly the argument of "If it's not on the LiveCD then no user will ever use it or the OS" is?

23meg
January 7th, 2010, 09:40 PM
WINE


Trivia: According to popcon, 50% of Ubuntu users have WINE installed.

Merk42
January 7th, 2010, 09:46 PM
Trivia: According to popcon, 50% of Ubuntu users have WINE installed.

Really? Cool!
That was my point, I was trying to think of things people usually install after Ubuntu.

llawwehttam
January 7th, 2010, 09:49 PM
Personally I use GIMP a lot but I'm not too bothered as long as its still in the repos. I have slowly written one long apt line for when I install new systems so if GIMP it will jsut be added to the list.

I suppose it does make the iso slightly smaller which can only be an improvement (as long as an M$ paint equivalent is left in.)

23meg
January 7th, 2010, 10:01 PM
Really? Cool!
That was my point, I was trying to think of things people usually install after Ubuntu.

And I was supporting your point with a random statistic.

Merk42
January 7th, 2010, 10:06 PM
And I was supporting your point with a random statistic.

I know, I'm just saying I'm glad I guess well.

ogromano
January 7th, 2010, 10:54 PM
*HYPOTHETICAL*

I was going to use Ubuntu/Linux but didn't since on the LiveCD I didn't see the following

Photo Organizer
Video Editor
Accounting Software
WINE

See how silly the argument of "If it's not on the LiveCD then no user will ever use it or the OS" is?

This is not the point... a person will not make the decision on which apps the LiveCD doesn't come with... the idea is that the decision will be based on how appealing or impressive the LiveCD is with what it comes with! If there is another app that is more appealing to people, then remove GIMP and put that one but please don't "downgrade" the LiveCD by putting an M$Paint clone just to say that there is a graphics editor in there... might as well not put either of them and put something else that might attract people. Is F-spot (or something of the sort) good enough to whet the appetite of a possible user??

Merk42
January 7th, 2010, 11:02 PM
This is not the point... a person will not make the decision on which apps the LiveCD doesn't come with... the idea is that the decision will be based on how appealing or impressive the LiveCD is with what it comes with! If there is another app that is more appealing to people, then remove GIMP and put that one but please don't "downgrade" the LiveCD by putting an M$Paint clone just to say that there is a graphics editor in there... might as well not put either of them and put something else that might attract people. Is F-spot (or something of the sort) good enough to whet the appetite of a possible user??

It's exactly the point though.
You're saying the person will make a decision solely "how appealing or impressive the LiveCD is with what it comes with". I'm saying that's clearly not the case since there are many users out there that use Ubuntu even though the LiveCD didn't come with something they use often.

Also, I really wish people would stop the misconception that F-Spot is claiming to be a graphics editor. It's not. Ubuntu (and even GIMP devs) feel the average user is more concerned about organizing their photos than editing them (aside from, crop, rotate, red eye etc which will be in F-Spot as of Lucid)

qamelian
January 8th, 2010, 02:13 AM
Ubuntu (and even GIMP devs) feel the average user is more concerned about organizing their photos than editing them (aside from, crop, rotate, red eye etc which will be in F-Spot as of Lucid)

I keep hearing this and I still say based on the average users I have first-hand experience with that they are wrong.

Merk42
January 8th, 2010, 02:27 AM
I keep hearing this and I still say based on the average users I have first-hand experience with that they are wrong.

I'm confused, I thought you wanted to keep GIMP on the LiveCD because you go to clients a lot to use it.

If a lot of your clients use GIMP themselves, why isn't it installed on their systems?

dyslexia
January 8th, 2010, 02:42 AM
my photos are on a different file system ... mounted read-only so Linux can't screw it up...

but if/when I have an app that allows bulk manipulation of light/color balance I'll mount it rw and organize the **** out of it.

saulgoode
January 8th, 2010, 05:41 AM
Ubuntu (and even GIMP devs) feel the average user is more concerned about organizing their photos than editing them ...

Citation?

Not only would it be nice to see where the Ubuntu developers actually stated such a view, it would be nice to see the evidence supporting the claim. They readily dismiss the viewpoint (http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=8360897&postcount=191) provided by feedback from the forum community as being statistically unreliable (http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=8361502&postcount=197), but present no results of their own research into user preferences.

One should indeed be skeptical of wrong conclusions being drawn from surveys and polls, and prudence dictates that one should be critical of the manner in which the polls were conducted. Both the poll in this thread and another that took place in the Community Cafe strongly indicate that a significant portion this forum community has a preference for keeping GIMP on the LiveCD. Yes, there are many factors that may diminish how meaningful these poll results are, but thus far those who would dismiss these results altogether have presented absolutely zero evidence to the contrary.

If Canonical's Design Team has actually "surveyed X computer users in Y city about how they use Z, ...”, and these surveys support the decision to remove GIMP from the Ubuntu CD, then indeed where are the results published (" ...this was our interview script, and these are our results")? How is one to decide whether the Design Team's conclusions were accurately drawn? How is one to assess the manner in which their survey was conducted? And, perhaps most importantly, how is the Free Software community to benefit from this research if it is not shared openly?

This same lack of transparency is exhibited in the decision-making process with regard to GIMP taking up too much disk space. Upon what data was this based? It has already been pointed out that the size of the Ubuntu GIMP package is erroneously reported to be 5 times its actual value (33Mb versus 6.4Mb). Was this erroneous information a contributing factor in the decision?

Was leaving out the GIMP help package considered as an option? This in itself would free up 15Mb on the LiveCD, leaving GIMP to consume less than 1% of the disk space (not a misconceived 5% suggested by the Ubuntu package's erroneous meta-data). It is my understanding that OpenOffice help files are not included on the LiveCD, so the concept is not unprecedented. Is it even atypical to exclude help files from the CD? (Firefox help files are not included, but one might reasonably assume that a potential Firefox user would have an Internet connection :) ).

Omitting the GIMP help files from the CD would still provide those without access to the Internet a fully functioning GIMP, including pop-up infoboxes describing every function and tool (per the GNOME HIG recommendation), as well as contextual hints being provided in the status bar; and those who do have an Internet connection would be provided with fully integrated access to the online help. Since the latter is the same group of users who would be asked to 'apt-get' the program, it is only the former group (those without Internet) who have to be considered when the CD is used for a permanent installation -- though even Internet users would see some degree of benefit.

Is it worthwhile to employ 1% of the disk space in order to make the LiveCD more appealing? Several use cases have been presented that suggest this to be true. LiveCDs are often used as a showcase of the distro; they may also be used to non-intrusively work on someone else's machine; or to check out hardware compatibility (what other application provides a means of testing a graphics pad?). These may not be the most common scenarios, but they do exist and they do benefit from GIMP being on the LiveCD. Add to this the cases where Internet connections are not available (or inconvenient) and one can start to evaluate the actual trade-offs this decision entails.

Maybe there isn't room on the CD for the 6.4Mb that GIMP would require. But the Ubuntu developers have not, as Mr Thomas asserts, provided rationales that would justify its removal; at least not in a manner transparent enough to support critical review and constructive analysis of the information upon which their decision was based. This is, after all, nothing more than the expectation he himself put forth for those opposed to the decision. Should it not likewise apply to those promoting it?

Merk42
January 8th, 2010, 05:58 AM
Citation?

I guess the best place is here (http://www.youtube.com/ubuntudevelopers#p/a/u/1/olDMAYD7t3k) (fast forward until about 30min). Someone knows of some other source.

Why they feel that way I don't know, but that's not to say they haven't researched

ranch hand
January 8th, 2010, 06:06 AM
That is just an excellent post saulgoode.

Thank you.

I have been waiting and looking for this "data" myself. I have found no trace of it. I, personally think it was pulled out of someones fundament.

saulgoode
January 8th, 2010, 06:13 AM
I guess the best place is here (http://www.youtube.com/ubuntudevelopers#p/a/u/1/olDMAYD7t3k) (fast forward until about 30min). Someone knows of some other source.
Could you please quote directly what was stated? I wasn't able to find anything that said about organizing photos being a greater concern than image editing.

I did notice that the chairman of the discussion (the guy in the orange shirt) stated that GIMP without help consumed "40 megabytes" on the CD. So it would indeed appear that this decision was premised upon extremely faulty information.

Merk42
January 8th, 2010, 07:36 AM
Could you please quote directly what was stated? I wasn't able to find anything that said about organizing photos being a greater concern than image editing.
You're right, I'm sorry.
They feel that the average user is doing simple tasks: Red eye, crop, rotate, etc which Lucid's F-Spot will accomplish with a simple one button interface rather than the overkill of GIMP.
Not that it matters, since I'm going to guess a lot of opponents are going to ask where they got that information from too.

I did notice that the chairman of the discussion (the guy in the orange shirt) stated that GIMP without help consumed "40 megabytes" on the CD. So it would indeed appear that this decision was premised upon extremely faulty information.
As for the "40 Megabytes" it sounds like he says "4 Megs" around 28:20

zekopeko
January 8th, 2010, 08:35 AM
You're right, I'm sorry.
They feel that the average user is doing simple tasks: Red eye, crop, rotate, etc which Lucid's F-Spot will accomplish with a simple one button interface rather than the overkill of GIMP.
Not that it matters, since I'm going to guess a lot of opponents are going to ask where they got that information from too.

Can't wait until someone tries and explain that the target audience of Ubuntu are artists who really, really need GIMP.

saulgoode
January 8th, 2010, 09:13 AM
You're right, I'm sorry.
They feel that the average user is doing simple tasks: Red eye, crop, rotate, etc which Lucid's F-Spot will accomplish with a simple one button interface rather than the overkill of GIMP.
Not that it matters, since I'm going to guess a lot of opponents are going to ask where they got that information from too.
Well, I meant no offense by requesting a citation. I should have been just as pleased if you'd pointed out the source. I just prefer to examine openly the facts so as to avoid misinterpretation or errors (see next section :) ).


As for the "40 Megabytes" it sounds like he says "4 Megs" around 28:20
In this case, you are right, and I am sorry. The mention of "two language packs" would suggest that GIMP's size was most likely considered to be in the neighborhood of four megabytes. As a side note, I was under the impression that Ubuntu didn't include language packs on its LiveCD, but perhaps I am wrong and they do squeeze some in. (I could search for the source of this impression if you wish; I believe it stemmed from a comparison/criticism made by a Fedora developer.)

Certainly if an accurate size assessment was employed in making the decision, that would lend it credence. I am actually a bit surprised that at 4Mb GIMP's size would be that much of an issue. It would seem rather dwarfed by the 50Mb (or thereabouts) of OpenOffice and the 33Mb of GCC, which isn't even installed unless proprietary drivers are to be installed (and doesn't this assume Internet access, or are the restricted driver packages also consuming space on the LiveCD?). Personally, I would consider a spreadsheet program (OOo-calc 4.7Mb) a more likely candidate for removal owing to a lack of utility to "average users".

I guess I am just disappointed at the lack of any technical presentation of the rationales that one comes to expect during the course of a typical trade study. I'm certainly disappointed that the proponents of this decision seem so ready to ridicule the experiences and opinions of those questioning it without providing any supporting evidence for their own views.

zekopeko
January 8th, 2010, 09:43 AM
Certainly if an accurate size assessment was employed in making the decision, that would lend it credence. I am actually a bit surprised that at 4Mb GIMP's size would be that much of an issue. It would seem rather dwarfed by the 50Mb (or thereabouts) of OpenOffice and the 33Mb of GCC, which isn't even installed unless proprietary drivers are to be installed (and doesn't this assume Internet access, or are the restricted driver packages also consuming space on the LiveCD?). Personally, I would consider a spreadsheet program (OOo-calc 4.7Mb) a more likely candidate for removal owing to a lack of utility to "average users".

Actually people use spreadsheet programs for home accounting and they can generate pretty graphs which then I can use in my essays.
And as for GCC isn't it used for DKMS, which is used for a number of kernel modules?


I guess I am just disappointed at the lack of any technical presentation of the rationales that one comes to expect during the course of a typical trade study. I'm certainly disappointed that the proponents of this decision seem so ready to ridicule the experiences and opinions of those questioning it without providing any supporting evidence for their own views.

When people that develop said software approve of this decision saying that said software isn't really meant for the target audience, "technical presentation(s) of (the) rationales" are wasting time on common sense decisions. If we have to debate everything to death before something is done then whats the point since nothing is ever going to be done at all?

Not to mention wanting people that agree with this decision provide supporting evidence for a logical conclusion that follows from: average user needs/doesn't need an advanced image editing software. So either everyone is advanced or only some are advanced. Which makes more logical sense?

saulgoode
January 8th, 2010, 10:58 AM
Actually people use spreadsheet programs for home accounting and they can generate pretty graphs which then I can use in my essays.

Interesting how you transitioned from the third person viewpoint to the first. Weren't you the one accusing others of selfishly advocating their own personal desires?


And as for GCC isn't it used for DKMS, which is used for a number of kernel modules?
If the modules are Free Software, there is no need for the user to compile them. It is their proprietary nature which dictates that a working binary can't be provided.


When people that develop said software approve of this decision saying that said software isn't really meant for the target audience, "technical presentation(s) of (the) rationales" are wasting time on common sense decisions. If we have to debate everything to death before something is done then whats the point since nothing is ever going to be done at all?
Over half of the people who've expressed their opinion in these forums disagree that it is a "common sense decision". Perhaps a review of the dictionary definition of the word "common" would be in order (or even the word "sense")?

And asking to have the rationale presented should not entail extra effort; the homework should have already been done and all that is being requested is to see the work.


Not to mention wanting people that agree with this decision provide supporting evidence for a logical conclusion that follows from: average user needs/doesn't need an advanced image editing software. So either everyone is advanced or only some are advanced. Which makes more logical sense?

The logical approach would be to address whether having GIMP on the LiveCD is of more benefit to Ubuntu than whatever else would otherwise occupy that same space. This is not a "common sense decision" -- and certainly not considered so by the members of these forums -- it is an analysis of benefits versus costs and it should be based on more than just unsubstantiated claims about the supposed needs of the hypothetical "average user".

zekopeko
January 8th, 2010, 01:06 PM
Interesting how you transitioned from the third person viewpoint to the first. Weren't you the one accusing others of selfishly advocating their own personal desires?

ZOMG!!!! The horror. I wrote a sentence that structurally/semantically/grammatically/whatever sucks. On the internet.

Just because I use calc on occasion doesn't mean there isn't value for the average user. You are going to be completely shocked that I use GIMP fairly often. Look at me being all altruistic and ****.


If the modules are Free Software, there is no need for the user to compile them. It is their proprietary nature which dictates that a working binary can't be provided.

http://packages.ubuntu.com/karmic/openafs-modules-dkms

It looks like DKMS minimizes the need to recompile modules against different kernel versions.
And lets not forget that there is this thing called closed-source software. People use it.


Over half of the people who've expressed their opinion in these forums disagree that it is a "common sense decision". Perhaps a review of the dictionary definition of the word "common" would be in order (or even the word "sense")?

How much is "over half of the people"? Compared to the, generally accepted, number of 8+ million Ubuntu users? Or even the number of active user of these forums?


And asking to have the rationale presented should not entail extra effort; the homework should have already been done and all that is being requested is to see the work.

There was a UDS session and it was decided by the people developing Ubuntu that GIMP should go. I don't see people crying for removing a huge amount of games. Or doing "homework" on that.



The logical approach would be to address whether having GIMP on the LiveCD is of more benefit to Ubuntu than whatever else would otherwise occupy that same space. This is not a "common sense decision" -- and certainly not considered so by the members of these forums -- it is an analysis of benefits versus costs and it should be based on more than just unsubstantiated claims about the supposed needs of the hypothetical "average user".

Let me correct you. A tiny, tiny percent of the members of these forums... carry on.
BTW would you say that we need a cost/benefit analysis for the removal of some games? And for the addition of the new application indicators, Me menu, USC2, gwibber, new artwork...?

If there is space after they add all this then keep GIMP.

saulgoode
January 8th, 2010, 02:30 PM
Let me correct you. A tiny, tiny percent of the members of these forums... carry on.
I suspect that you lack understanding of the mathematics underlying polls. Here is the abridged version: the accuracy of a poll taken in this forum is not dependent upon how many forum members there are; it is only dependent upon the number of people participating in the poll. It does not matter if 1000 people vote out of 10000, or 1000 people vote out of 10000000, the accuracy of the poll (its margin of error) will still be the inverse of the square root of the number of voters.

Given that 944 members have voted in this poll (at the time of this post), its margin of error would be calculated as 3.3 percent. Regardless of how "tiny, tiny" a percentage this is of the total population, the results represent within the given accuracy the opinion of the entire population.

In other words, somewhere between 53% and 59% of the members of this forum should be expected to disagree with the decision to remove GIMP. At least that many would not characterize it as a "common sense decision" (perhaps more as some of those who ultimately agree with the choice still might not consider it "common sense").

If you feel this is counter-intuitive and mere fabrication, please feel free to research the topics of polls, sampling, and standard deviations of error ratios.

lukjad007
January 8th, 2010, 02:52 PM
So the plan, whilst obviously not 100% final, is to ditch the GIMP from Lucid.

https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/desktop-lucid-default-apps

I think this is a good call - it uses space, the average user never uses it to its potential and could easily do what they need to in other applications.

I'd still rather we got rid of F-Spot, too though. It's a lame exucse of a photo manager...

Not sold on PiTiVi as the best choice of video editor. The tone of the meeting about default apps was very heavily decided in favour of trying pitivi, and OpenShot wasn't seriously considered despite the fact it's, imo at least, the better of the two.
I don't think it's really good or bad. If people want GIMP, they can install it. So I would say it's more on the "Good" side than on the "Bad" side. But there is no "Medium" vote, so I cannot accurately reflect my opinion in your poll.

BwackNinja
January 8th, 2010, 03:40 PM
I suspect that you lack understanding of the mathematics underlying polls. Here is the abridged version: the accuracy of a poll taken in this forum is not dependent upon how many forum members there are; it is only dependent upon the number of people participating in the poll. It does not matter if 1000 people vote out of 10000, or 1000 people vote out of 10000000, the accuracy of the poll (its margin of error) will still be the inverse of the square root of the number of voters.
<snip>

Sampling bias. The kind of people in this part of the forums wouldn't have much trouble with simply changing the defaults and are in general more competent computer users than the norm. The people here are specifically more willing and able to learn such a piece of software if the need ever really arises for them than the average user. Once again, sampling bias.

ronacc
January 8th, 2010, 03:48 PM
to all of those quoting statictics eg 92% of users think gimp is too complicated .
Quite simply put statistics such as 72% of blah balh prefer halb halb are meaningless noise used to try to convice someone of something ( that a position is correct or to buy something ,etc) . Unless you know the context of the statistcs they are valueless numbers . Give me
1 the sample size .
2 the sample selection criteria AND the actual method used .
3 the EXACT text of the questions put .
4 the sieving method ,what was considered a yes and what a no for example .
5 the COMPLETE raw data including all "discarded" results .
6 all data reduction methods used to manipulate the data .
then your results take on some meaning.

any first year statistics student if he/she didn't sleep through every class can design you a poll to prove anything you want , just ask the right questions and throw out any answer you don't like .

BwackNinja
January 8th, 2010, 03:52 PM
Yup, and theres a big difference between someone being asked if the gimp is too difficult to use and saying yes, versus being set in front of the gimp, given a simple task and a time limit, and judging whether or not it was able to be completed.

ranch hand
January 8th, 2010, 03:55 PM
to all of those quoting statictics eg 92% of users think gimp is too complicated .
Quite simply put statistics such as 72% of blah balh prefer halb halb are meaningless noise used to try to convice someone of something ( that a position is correct or to buy something ,etc) . Unless you know the context of the statistcs they are valueless numbers . Give me
1 the sample size .
2 the sample selection criteria AND the actual method used .
3 the EXACT text of the questions put .
4 the sieving method ,what was considered a yes and what a no for example .
5 the COMPLETE raw data including all "discarded" results .
6 all data reduction methods used to manipulate the data .
then your results take on some meaning.

any first year statistics student if he/she didn't sleep through every class can design you a poll to prove anything you want , just ask the right questions and throw out any answer you don't like .

Decades ago a standard text in 101 stat college class' was "how to lie with statistics". Fun book that everyone should be required to read before being allowed to do things like vote.

ronacc
January 8th, 2010, 03:59 PM
amen

Mahngiel
January 8th, 2010, 04:03 PM
^ this

zekopeko
January 8th, 2010, 06:02 PM
bla bla bla bla....

If you feel this is counter-intuitive and mere fabrication, please feel free to research the topics of polls, sampling, and standard deviations of error ratios.

Sorry, you are still failing. The poll isn't representative of anything except the preferences of ~900 people that voted.
Your poll participants are self-selected. So you have no idea if they are representative of the wider Ubuntu community. The poll is simply too shallow to actually show anything that can be used for some serious reflections.

zekopeko
January 8th, 2010, 06:04 PM
to all of those quoting statictics eg 92% of users think gimp is too complicated .
Quite simply put statistics such as 72% of blah balh prefer halb halb are meaningless noise used to try to convice someone of something ( that a position is correct or to buy something ,etc) . Unless you know the context of the statistcs they are valueless numbers . Give me
1 the sample size .
2 the sample selection criteria AND the actual method used .
3 the EXACT text of the questions put .
4 the sieving method ,what was considered a yes and what a no for example .
5 the COMPLETE raw data including all "discarded" results .
6 all data reduction methods used to manipulate the data .
then your results take on some meaning.

any first year statistics student if he/she didn't sleep through every class can design you a poll to prove anything you want , just ask the right questions and throw out any answer you don't like .

Hey thanks! I'm going to use this anytime somebody starts saying how the poll shows XX% people are for keeping GIMP. Mmmmm.... sweet, sweet irony.

Merk42
January 8th, 2010, 06:06 PM
Hey thanks! I'm going to use this anytime somebody starts saying how X poll shows Y% people are for Z.

ronacc
January 8th, 2010, 06:25 PM
Hey thanks! I'm going to use this anytime somebody starts saying how the poll shows XX% people are for keeping GIMP. Mmmmm.... sweet, sweet irony.

yes feel free to use it , The truth should be for all .
but please note that I have NEVER quoted statistics in an attempt to justify my opinion that Gimp should not be removed , and have infact stated that it was MY opinion and did not represent anything other than that .

zekopeko
January 8th, 2010, 06:29 PM
yes feel free to use it , The truth should be for all .
but please note that I have NEVER quoted statistics in an attempt to justify my opinion that Gimp should not be removed , and have infact stated that it was MY opinion and did not represent anything other than that .

It was a general irony, not specifically tied to you.

zekopeko
January 8th, 2010, 06:32 PM
Hey thanks! I'm going to use this anytime somebody starts saying how X poll shows Y% people are for Z.

Are you me? :D

nanotube
January 8th, 2010, 06:39 PM
Hey thanks! I'm going to use this anytime somebody starts saying how the poll shows XX% people are for keeping GIMP. Mmmmm.... sweet, sweet irony.

er... you do realize that you actually /do/ have all this information in this case? you know the exact wording of the poll question, you have the raw data, etc.

zekopeko
January 8th, 2010, 06:50 PM
er... you do realize that you actually /do/ have all this information in this case? you know the exact wording of the poll question, you have the raw data, etc.

Self-selected sample a.k.a. biased sample.

kaitwospirit
January 8th, 2010, 07:03 PM
Yeah, the sampling here is biased. Think of it this way: every fast-food chain has some kind of comment cards that you can fill out to state your opinion on the restaurant, etc. Who is most likely to fill out those comment cards? People who are REALLY PISSED about something that happened to them at the restaurant that day, or people who were really surprised about someone going above and beyond their job description for them. Self-selected polls mean that mainly only people with really strong, really firm opinions vote, and that will always skew the results.

nanotube
January 8th, 2010, 07:23 PM
Self-selected sample a.k.a. biased sample.

yes, but that information is /also/ available to you. you know that the poll was posted in ubuntuforums, in such and such section, and you can make your own inferences as to the type of sample bias the placement of the survey introduces.

zekopeko
January 8th, 2010, 07:28 PM
yes, but that information is /also/ available to you. you know that the poll was posted in ubuntuforums, in such and such section, and you can make your own inferences as to the type of sample bias the placement of the survey introduces.

No I can't. I have no idea how many people view this forums each day, how many people viewed these thread (and voted) and what is their occupation/hobby, age and tons of other questions.

The only thing that you can see from this poll is that of some 900 people the majority don't like the whole de-GIMPing Ubuntu.

nanotube
January 8th, 2010, 07:44 PM
No I can't. I have no idea how many people view this forums each day, how many people viewed this thread (and voted)


that information is available.



and what is their occupation/hobby, age and tons of other questions.

that information is not available even to the original pollster.

allow me to repaste your original comment here:



to all of those quoting statictics eg 92% of users think gimp is too complicated .
Quite simply put statistics such as 72% of blah balh prefer halb halb are meaningless noise used to try to convice someone of something ( that a position is correct or to buy something ,etc) . Unless you know the context of the statistcs they are valueless numbers . Give me
1 the sample size .
2 the sample selection criteria AND the actual method used .
3 the EXACT text of the questions put .
4 the sieving method ,what was considered a yes and what a no for example .
5 the COMPLETE raw data including all "discarded" results .
6 all data reduction methods used to manipulate the data .
then your results take on some meaning.

any first year statistics student if he/she didn't sleep through every class can design you a poll to prove anything you want , just ask the right questions and throw out any answer you don't like .
Hey thanks! I'm going to use this anytime somebody starts saying how the poll shows XX% people are for keeping GIMP. Mmmmm.... sweet, sweet irony.


and now let's go through these one by one:
sample size: check
sample selection criteria and actual method used: check
exact text of questions: check
sieving method: check
raw data: check
data reduction methods: check

so, while anyone can appreciate the 'snark' value of saying "ha, i can apply it to this very same survey", in this case, you /really, really/ cannot.

now, you can surely come up with any number of /other/ problems with this survey, but the problem of "the surveyor has not released all the data, and selectively manipulated/filtered it to say what he wants" is NOT one of them.

in summary, i hope you can appreciate the snark value of my saying at this point: NYAH. and also including a link to this webcomic: http://xkcd.com/386/

:)

zekopeko
January 8th, 2010, 08:09 PM
that information is available.

Where? Did you miss the part "viewed (and voted)"? Thats the important one.


that information is not available even to the original pollster.

Because polls on vbulletin aren't meant for serious analysis. The are simple gimmicks to entertain the crowds. You know, like in ancient Rome with the gladiators and stuff.


allow me to repaste your original comment here:
and now let's go through these one by one:
sample size: check
sample selection criteria and actual method used: check
exact text of questions: check
sieving method: check
raw data: check
data reduction methods: check

so, while anyone can appreciate the 'snark' value of saying "ha, i can apply it to this very same survey", in this case, you /really, really/ cannot.

Mmmm... yes I can. The whole point is that the poll is worthless. If you want to go all verbatim on the criteria for evaluating the poll seriously then sure, all of those are "checked". The poll is still worthless and you can't come to any relevant conclusion (I've bold-ed the important word so you know were to look for context).



now, you can surely come up with any number of /other/ problems with this survey, but the problem of "the surveyor has not released all the data, and selectively manipulated/filtered it to say what he wants" is NOT one of them.

Where did I say that?
I wasn't implying that somebody manipulated the votes on purpose.


in summary, i hope you can appreciate the snark value of my saying at this point: NYAH. and also including a link to this webcomic: http://xkcd.com/386/:)

Sweet! Stick figures I can relate to. My life now officially has meaning. Wait... am I being snark-y?

ronacc
January 8th, 2010, 08:24 PM
the very fact that the poll was take in the ubuntu forums is proof that it was a selfselecting sample . Actualy self selecting in several ways ,
1 only forum users saw/took the poll .
2 the poll was only answered by people who posted to that particular thread in in that particular subsection of the overall forum .
3 of the above described selfselected sample it further selected only those that are inclined to answer such polls . to me this says that the sample ( regardless of the actual # of participants ) was so restricetd that any conclusion would be irrelavent .

zekopeko
January 8th, 2010, 08:39 PM
the very fact that the poll was take in the ubuntu forums is proof that it was a selfselecting sample . Actualy self selecting in several ways ,
1 only forum users saw/took the poll .
2 the poll was only answered by people who posted to that particular thread in in that particular subsection of the overall forum .
3 of the above described selfselected sample it further selected only those that are inclined to answer such polls . to me this says that the sample ( regardless of the actual # of participants ) was so restricetd that any conclusion would be irrelavent .

Yey for reason! Can we now turn this thread into something fun?

ronacc
January 8th, 2010, 08:50 PM
yes lets liven it up and go for 1000 posts , we haven't had one of those in the dev forum for awhile .

nanotube
January 8th, 2010, 09:08 PM
Where? Did you miss the part "viewed (and voted)"? Thats the important one.


no, i didn't. views are listed on the subforum list page:
http://ubuntuforums.org/forumdisplay.php?f=377

and we currently have 22,707 views of this thread.



...blabla about poll quality...

i'm by no means arguing that this poll gives useful results. all i'm saying is that the original post about availability of various information, which you claimed applies to this poll, does not, in fact, apply to this poll.



Where did I say that?
I wasn't implying that somebody manipulated the votes on purpose.

the original post about the availability of various information was making that overall point, that he'll only treat a poll seriously if all that information is made available by the pollster, otherwise they could have manipulated question wording and results.



Sweet! Stick figures I can relate to.

how can one /not/ like xkcd? :)

at any rate... i think we're simply talking about different things. i was pointing out the purely technical issue that the question of information availability, as stated in that original post, did not apply to this poll. you assumed that i was claiming that this poll provides sufficient data to reach useful conclusions (i wasn't), and argued against that purported claim.

i agree that this poll does have problems regarding its applicability to the broad population of ubuntu users. just not with the claim that the problems described in that post apply to it.

ogromano
January 8th, 2010, 09:40 PM
Holy cow.. you guys still talking about this!!!??? :shock::lolflag:


I'll check back later when you reach the 1000th post!!



Keep it going!!!

ronacc
January 8th, 2010, 10:46 PM
no, i didn't. views are listed on the subforum list page:
http://ubuntuforums.org/forumdisplay.php?f=377
the original post about the availability of various information was making that overall point, that he'll only treat a poll seriously if all that information is made available by the pollster, otherwise they could have manipulated question wording and results.
.

I am the OP and I was not implying that anything ,was or needed to be deliberately manipulated and was not referring to this poll specifically merely pointing out that statistics are a very slippery thing and one should not take stock in them with out sufficient knowledge of how they were arrived at , A poorly worded question or biased sample is as misleading as a deliberate lie .

Merk42
January 8th, 2010, 11:45 PM
no, i didn't. views are listed on the subforum list page:
http://ubuntuforums.org/forumdisplay.php?f=377

and we currently have 22,707 views of this thread.


I'm pretty sure the way vBulletin works, that's views, not viewers

ranch hand
January 9th, 2010, 12:10 AM
I'm pretty sure the way vBulletin works, that's views, not viewers
I think so too. Most are probably the people that have posted here.

minderman
January 15th, 2010, 10:17 PM
I think its a shame that Gimp should disappear from new distro's. I use it frequently.
But OK, it will be possible to get it from one of the repositories, so ...

BUT WHY DOESNT IT WORK RIGHT NOW ANYMORE. :(

It just disappeared from my 9.04 installation and just can't be reinstalled anymore. Something else seem to be in the way and I have no idea what that could be....

Anyone with a suggestion?

Murdoc_of_puts
January 16th, 2010, 05:40 AM
-Minderman, Have you tried starting gimp from the terminal, or look in synaptic to see if you accidently un-installed it?

-Thing 2-> What if entirely removing gimp from the live cd, they only released it on the ltr'S, and not regulars. This would be the .04's and not the .10's(just in case I mixed that up). This would let there be more room for things on the reg releases, and still give people a way to showcase "the wonderful world of Linux" with all of the neat gizmos. Or do the opposite, take it off of ltr and put it on regs. What ever, They release one every six months.

-why don't they put a couple of actually needed programs on the cd's, Like build essential? (I know that you can install it from the cd, but I think it should be installed from the start....Pain in my *** to figure out why my source builds weren't working when I first started out.

cariboo907
January 16th, 2010, 08:00 AM
-why don't they put a couple of actually needed programs on the cd's, Like build essential? (I know that you can install it from the cd, but I think it should be installed from the start....Pain in my *** to figure out why my source builds weren't working when I first started out.

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but build essentials have been installed by default since Jaunty.

minderman
January 16th, 2010, 04:45 PM
Hi Murdoc_of_puts

-'Minderman, Have you tried starting gimp from the terminal, or look in synaptic to see if you accidently un-installed it?'

Yes and I didn't un-install the Gimp; maybe I installed something else.
As you suggested I tried to start up from the terminal. But the Gimp simply dissapeared. So I tried to reinstall it with apt install. This is what I got back (I'm working with 9.04):

The following packages have unmet dependencies:
gimp: Depends: python-support (>= 0.90.0) but 0.8.7ubuntu4 is to be installed
E: Broken packages

-Thing 2-> Like I said: I'll always find it when I need it. There are a lot of things I use not in the standard install. So I will not be disappointed if its space is used for some other things.

Henk

ranch hand
January 16th, 2010, 04:49 PM
Have you checked in synaptic>status to see about the broken packages?

This may be a good idea. Who knows what else is involved that may become a bigger problem.

Murdoc_of_puts
January 16th, 2010, 05:46 PM
-minderman

check broken packages, as said, and also you need to install python(don't know why it's not there). Any time you see an unmet dependency you need to install that so that the program will work.

--Thing2-> unless you select the programing set, it won't install build-essentials automatically, and some times not even then. From my exp any way.

Roasted
January 17th, 2010, 04:52 AM
I still don't understand Ubuntu.

Make 1 LiveCD. Basic install. For Ubuntu/Kubuntu/Xubuntu/individualized for whatever flavor you want.

Make 1 DVD. Full install. With options to install any desktop environment you want and a good chunk of additional software pre-installed that's common - gimp included.

OMG. BLAM. GENIUS. GIVE ME THE NOBEL PRIZE.

phillw
January 17th, 2010, 05:37 AM
I still don't understand Ubuntu.

Make 1 LiveCD. Basic install. For Ubuntu/Kubuntu/Xubuntu/individualized for whatever flavor you want.

Make 1 DVD. Full install. With options to install any desktop environment you want and a good chunk of additional software pre-installed that's common - gimp included.

OMG. BLAM. GENIUS. GIVE ME THE NOBEL PRIZE.

Not everyone has DVD drive. It is how do we make the most use of the CD.

Removes Nobel Prize and points poster to the link in my Sig ;-)

Regards,

Phill.

Roasted
January 17th, 2010, 05:49 AM
Not everyone has DVD drive. It is how do we make the most use of the CD.

Removes Nobel Prize and points poster to the link in my Sig ;-)

Regards,

Phill.


I still don't understand Ubuntu.

Make 1 LiveCD. Basic install. For Ubuntu/Kubuntu/Xubuntu/individualized for whatever flavor you want.

Make 1 DVD. Full install. With options to install any desktop environment you want and a good chunk of additional software pre-installed that's common - gimp included.

OMG. BLAM. GENIUS. GIVE ME THE NOBEL PRIZE.

I wasn't saying make DVD only. I said make it an option. Clearly they're packing entirely too much data onto a CD to handle. So let's handle it with some sort of logic. Make a full blown install for those with DVD, and make a basic LiveCD install (like it has been for years) for CD installs.

I'll take that nobel prize back thx...

cmckdub
January 17th, 2010, 06:23 AM
I love GIMP. Ordinarily I would say that it is a mistake to take it out. Reading what people have said I can now understand leaving it out. But I also appreciate people asking for a comparison to that horrible abomination in Windows of Paint (though it is lots better in Windows 7).
I do not see GIMP as good a painting program though. It's best value seems to be image editing (like Photoshop elephants - which I also do not see as a good painting application)
For an alternative? I have seen and used TuxPaint in Windows, and it was a pleasant experience. TuxPaint is also available in the repositories. However it may not be any saving in CD space. (Tuxpaint is listed as Paint program for children - I think only children would seriously use Paint in Windows ;) )

BwackNinja
January 17th, 2010, 07:30 AM
I wasn't saying make DVD only. I said make it an option. Clearly they're packing entirely too much data onto a CD to handle. So let's handle it with some sort of logic. Make a full blown install for those with DVD, and make a basic LiveCD install (like it has been for years) for CD installs.

I'll take that nobel prize back thx...

I think you were misunderstood because the DVD already exists. Its nothing new and has been around for quite a few releases. Not just a special idea you've come up with.

Roasted
January 17th, 2010, 07:47 AM
I think you were misunderstood because the DVD already exists. Its nothing new and has been around for quite a few releases. Not just a special idea you've come up with.

Ubuntu does a fantastic job of advertising that.

puzzler995
January 18th, 2010, 07:49 PM
GIMP is an awesome alternative to Photoshop that Ubuntu helps spread. We need to keep supporting this!!!

growled
January 18th, 2010, 08:08 PM
From my experience most users only need something like gthumb for editing images. They don't need the Gimp. For those of us that like and use the Gimp it's only an install away.

gabo.cr
January 18th, 2010, 10:53 PM
I use Gimp once in a while, mostly to edit pictures that I have.
If Gimp is going to be removed, it should be replaced at least by something less complicated to use.

Ibidem
January 18th, 2010, 11:11 PM
The numbers below are per Aptitude on my GTK-based system.
Gimp: 13 mb download
Fspot: 10 mb download, including Mono
Banshee: 48.8 mb download, including Mono
Gimp+Tomboy+ Fspot+Mono: 52 MB download, 129MB installed

Solution:
- ubuntu-desktop
- mono-runtime
+ gimp
That's my own take on it; why use a slower extra library (which, btw, some folks don't want) for the sake of a basic text-editor, a crummy image viewer, and a different music player?
I do not have ubuntu-desktop or ubuntu-netbook installed, and partly for this reason, I will leave them uninstalled.

On the topic of Mono, I don't mind it, but for performance reasons I do not want touse anything that needs it. In my opinion, it should be ranked below WINE in importance.
Xubuntu includes the GIMP, fortunately.

faical117
January 18th, 2010, 11:32 PM
yes is complicated .i too like to see gimp gone.;)

zekopeko
January 19th, 2010, 12:57 AM
GIMP is an awesome alternative to Photoshop that Ubuntu helps spread. We need to keep supporting this!!!

Once Ubuntu Software Center gets the Featured section nothing is stopping the devs from advertising it through that.


I use Gimp once in a while, mostly to edit pictures that I have.
If Gimp is going to be removed, it should be replaced at least by something less complicated to use.

F-Spot is going to have a simple sidebar for editing pictures. Stuff like crop, resize, red-eye etc. GIMP isn't going to be pulled without replacing the most common functionality.

gabo.cr
January 19th, 2010, 01:11 AM
F-Spot is going to have a simple sidebar for editing pictures. Stuff like crop, resize, red-eye etc. GIMP isn't going to be pulled without replacing the most common functionality.

Good!
I'm not against Gimp, but I agree with getting something simple instead if Gimp is getting removed from the installation CD.
If someone needs something with more tools and stuff, then they should download Gimp, but please, make Gimp a little more easy to use !

Ibidem
January 19th, 2010, 01:33 AM
That is just basic functionality for an image viewer. In the Gimp, however, I can make a new image, and manipulate the layers.

emarkay
January 19th, 2010, 01:37 AM
Someone needs to port the fantastic Windows program, Irfanview to Linux!

noob555
January 19th, 2010, 01:40 AM
I think Gimp is an excellent program. So I would hate to see it just disappear. But that doesn't mean it's appropriate as the default graphics program. I only use a fraction of Gimp's capabilities because I just don't need most of what's there. Most of what I want to do is play around with some photos and alter pdf docs. And other programs are much better for that.

I like gnomeuser's suggestion on page one of this thread,


We could even extend the software center to present valuable extra apps or something like a "creativity add on" which could install the best of breed such apps like blender, gimp and so on along perhaps with some instructional videos and sample content created with the tools.

Having a powerful creativity add on that's properly documented would be very useful for those of us who don't know all of what ubuntu is capable of doing.

Mr. Picklesworth
January 19th, 2010, 03:06 AM
I think Gimp is an excellent program. So I would hate to see it just disappear. But that doesn't mean it's appropriate as the default graphics program. I only use a fraction of Gimp's capabilities because I just don't need most of what's there. Most of what I want to do is play around with some photos and alter pdf docs. And other programs are much better for that.

I like gnomeuser's suggestion on page one of this thread,


We could even extend the software center to present valuable extra apps or something like a "creativity add on" which could install the best of breed such apps like blender, gimp and so on along perhaps with some instructional videos and sample content created with the tools.

Having a powerful creativity add on that's properly documented would be very useful for those of us who don't know all of what ubuntu is capable of doing.

That exists! It's called Ubuntu Studio.

Dragonbite
January 19th, 2010, 06:41 PM
I still don't understand Ubuntu.

Make 1 LiveCD. Basic install. For Ubuntu/Kubuntu/Xubuntu/individualized for whatever flavor you want.

Make 1 DVD. Full install. With options to install any desktop environment you want and a good chunk of additional software pre-installed that's common - gimp included.

Sounds like the Fedora and openSUSE route; they provide a DVD with everything in the repositories for pick-and-choosing your installation, as well as LiveCDs.

If one makes a DVD though, please keep it under 4 GB, so it can be placed on a 4 GB or larger USB drive instead of having to go with the 8GB or larger drive.

It would be an interesting option for Ubuntu to come out with an installation DVD, with software "packages" as starting points to help decide. Like an "Ubuntu Gnome" starter, where you can remove what you don't want (e.g. Banshee) and install what you want (e.g. Songbird) from the beginning so no orphaned libraries are hanging around.

cariboo907
January 19th, 2010, 06:46 PM
I like the idea of a DVD install disk for advanced users, but there should always be an easy to install CD for new users. To much choice will confuse a lot of people.

dnairb
January 19th, 2010, 06:48 PM
I'm not bothered about Gimp removal from the install CD. It's easy to install using Synaptic or sudo apt-get anyway.

The space made by removing gimp from the CD is best used (in my opinion) to include drivers so more hardware works out-of-the-box even on the livecd, to attract more users. This was the reason I used Ubuntu initially - the livecd worked with all the essential parts of my box.

x3roconf
January 19th, 2010, 08:49 PM
bye bye gimp

themadhatter
January 19th, 2010, 10:27 PM
And keep the Gimp, it's far more useful.

Digikid
January 19th, 2010, 10:29 PM
Be smart and leave it alone and IN the distro.

I DO agree with ditch F-Spot. HORRIBLE software. Also switch out that video editor that someone mentioned before and include OpenShot instead. Way better.


I still don't understand Ubuntu.

Make 1 LiveCD. Basic install. For Ubuntu/Kubuntu/Xubuntu/individualized for whatever flavor you want.

Make 1 DVD. Full install. With options to install any desktop environment you want and a good chunk of additional software pre-installed that's common - gimp included.

OMG. BLAM. GENIUS. GIVE ME THE NOBEL PRIZE.

EXCELLENT IDEA!!!!!

Do it Canonical!!!!

NCLI
January 19th, 2010, 10:32 PM
The numbers below are per Aptitude on my GTK-based system.
Gimp: 13 mb download
Fspot: 10 mb download, including Mono
Banshee: 48.8 mb download, including Mono
Gimp+Tomboy+ Fspot+Mono: 52 MB download, 129MB installed

Solution:
- ubuntu-desktop
- mono-runtime
+ gimp
That's my own take on it; why use a slower extra library (which, btw, some folks don't want) for the sake of a basic text-editor, a crummy image viewer, and a different music player?

A music player which is quickly moving into a leading position and might be the interesting as default in Lucid+1.

NZjelle
January 20th, 2010, 01:22 AM
I'm fine with removing GIMP from the default install. No problem with installing it from the repositories if necessary. As replacement I would nominate gThumb, which is adequate for simple viewing and editing. I realize other packages can do that too. In all cases you don't need to install an elephant gun as default for the occassional swatting of a fly.

While we're at it I also recommend removing F-spot and all other Mono applications. In total that will free up even more space, and I cannot think of any justification why such unnecessary and potentially patent encumbered applications should be in the default installation either.

pjc007
January 20th, 2010, 03:15 AM
GIMP is an excellent *FREE* image manip program, and I always demo it whenever I show what's on the Live CD to someone on their own hardware. If it's gone, that's a huge selling point missing.

Personally, I'd rather see F-spot, Mono, et al gone - out of curiosity, how much would that save?

That has the advantage of removing some potentially Microsoft IP-laden software from the distro - at least "by default". If people want to have mono, etc, let them choose to add it later.

-PJC

Merk42
January 20th, 2010, 03:20 AM
I'm fine with removing GIMP from the default install. No problem with installing it from the repositories if necessary. As replacement I would nominate gThumb, which is adequate for simple viewing and editing. I realize other packages can do that too. In all cases you don't need to install an elephant gun as default for the occassional swatting of a fly.

While we're at it I also recommend removing F-spot and all other Mono applications. In total that will free up even more space, and I cannot think of any justification why such unnecessary and potentially patent encumbered applications should be in the default installation either.

GIMP is an excellent *FREE* image manip program, and I always demo it whenever I show what's on the Live CD to someone on their own hardware. If it's gone, that's a huge selling point missing.

Personally, I'd rather see F-spot, Mono, et al gone - out of curiosity, how much would that save?

That has the advantage of removing some potentially Microsoft IP-laden software from the distro - at least "by default". If people want to have mono, etc, let them choose to add it later.

-PJC

I'm sorry, I thought this thread was about GIMP, not Mono.

Also, I think I've said it before in this thread (not that people read threads). Canonical has stated they have no problem with Mono. If you do, I suggest using a different distro.

phillw
January 20th, 2010, 03:27 AM
Be smart and leave it alone and IN the distro.

I DO agree with ditch F-Spot. HORRIBLE software. Also switch out that video editor that someone mentioned before and include OpenShot instead. Way better.



EXCELLENT IDEA!!!!!

Do it Canonical!!!!

Ubuntu on a DVD, whatever next ;-)

Here's the UK offering --> http://www.thelinuxstore.org.uk/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=41_47&products_id=1753

No doubt you have it over in the States ;-)

Phill

cariboo907
January 20th, 2010, 03:29 AM
Could we keep this thread on topic. Mono has nothing to do with Gimp.

I'm sure Gimp will still be on the DVD, so you can still demo it.

doublewitt
January 20th, 2010, 03:34 AM
In all cases you don't need to install an elephant gun as default for the occassional swatting of a fly.

That was funny...! ... made me laugh...

jsusanka
January 20th, 2010, 04:01 AM
I can understand the need to get rid of it on the cd. I think we should stick with a cd and not a dvd. But when someone goes to install ubuntu permanently I wish the gimp would install by default. Maybe the install could get it from the repose or something or have the deb package on the cd because I think the gimp shows the best of what open source can offer.

I don't want to start a flame war but I would also like to see all mono applications removed. There really is no need for them and why take the patent risk. We should remove the mono applications first and see where that leaves the space issue. Then if there is a space issue go ahead and not install gimp on the cd.

Anyway my two cents worth.

jsusanka
January 20th, 2010, 04:06 AM
I'm sorry, I thought this thread was about GIMP, not Mono.

Also, I think I've said it before in this thread (not that people read threads). Canonical has stated they have no problem with Mono. If you do, I suggest using a different distro.

It is this kind of thinking that will get people using another distro.
The thread was about space issue and removing gimp. I think we should do analysis on how much removing the mono applications would save versus removing the gimp. Has that been done?

Merk42
January 20th, 2010, 04:12 AM
It is this kind of thinking that will get people using another distro.
The thread was about space issue and removing gimp. I think we should do analysis on how much removing the mono applications would save versus removing the gimp. Has that been done?

The GIMP was never proposed to be removed due to space.

It was proposed to be removed for a simpler application, one that had the common features people used. Features like red eye, crop, resize, etc. The program that best fit this and will even better by Lucid's release is F-Spot (which uses Mono)

Also Lucid+1 has a good chance of switching from Rhythmbox to Banshee (which also uses Mono)

ronacc
January 20th, 2010, 05:22 AM
In all cases you don't need to install an elephant gun as default for the occassional swatting of a fly.


next time you have to deal with a marauding elephant don't grab your trusty flyswatter , it won't do much good .

CJN
January 20th, 2010, 06:01 AM
next time you have to deal with a marauding elephant don't grab your trusty flyswatter , it won't do much good .

In this case the marauding elephant is simple drawing/transparency functionality apparently. (Something that I haven't come across in basic "fly-swatter" photo-enhancing apps).

BTW I am not targeting ronacc he's right, I just want to make sure my post has context if someone snipes the next post position.

bingotailspin
January 20th, 2010, 06:03 AM
I don't mind having to load GIMP later from the repo.

I just hope that all the mono can be un-installed easily for those of us that don't want to promote those apps by using them.

AntoniusMisfit
January 20th, 2010, 07:36 AM
I think it's a colossal step backwards. GIMP has been part of the default installation from the very first release(Warty Warthog), and that helped to bring Ubuntu more on par with Mac OS X and Windows. When distro reviewers get around to testing Lucid, they will emphatically point out that "Ubuntu can't edit pictures" and will actually stay away from the repos as much as possible to keep the review fair.

What Canonical is planning is ripping out a genuinely useful and powerful piece of it's out-of-the-box experience for the sake of saving a few MB on a CD. I use GIMP often enough, specifically to make signs and textures to be used within the Second Life and OpenSim virtual world platforms. What I don't use, however is F-Spot. It's absolutely pitiful as a "photo organizer" and the picture editing abilities of it are shameful in comparison. I've never, ever used it for anything serious. F-Spot is a better candidate to be relegated to the repos.

Merk42
January 20th, 2010, 08:19 AM
...What Canonical is planning is ripping out a genuinely useful and powerful piece of it's out-of-the-box experience for the sake of saving a few MB on a CD...

Jeez how many times do I have to say this? GIMP isn't being removed due to space.

Also I use GIMP far more than F-Spot, but even I understand their reasoning.

ElSlunko
January 20th, 2010, 08:21 AM
Experienced users can't bring a "new user" perspective to this argument.

Merk42
January 20th, 2010, 08:24 AM
Experienced users can't bring a "new user" perspective to this argument.

Very interesting observation.

I suppose that sums up the earlier discussion on how the poll is flawed based on who it's polling.

New Users (the people for which this decision is being made), wouldn't yet know of Ubuntuforums.org and they certainly wouldn't be posting in the subforum for the development version.

ElSlunko
January 20th, 2010, 08:30 AM
Pretty much.

The reality is anyone who has used windows products to do graphic design or photo work has probably used Photoshop. As soon as they see and use gimp you'll hear the groans and moans about how its not as good as photoshop.

If it's a new user who hasn't used Photoshop and hasn't had a need to then you'll hear groans about how freaking complicated GIMP is for simple tasks that oh sayyyyyy iphoto does so easily.

Sure f-spot kinda stinks (though I used it pretty often before I found better solutions) but the rational behind the decision is the same. There needs to be a better entry level photo editor/organizer and a simple drawing program shipped with Ubuntu.

I know I didn't like GIMP when I first used it and tried very hard to get Photoshop to work in wine. Now I use GIMP and never looked back but it took years of practice and not a single live CD session.

pastalavista
January 20th, 2010, 09:11 AM
GIMP would still be available in the repositories, wouldn't it? Make room for more useful tools in the installation CD. Open Office already includes the Draw program.

edit:
I didn't read more than the first few posts in this thread, and I'm sure my two cents have been taken, but I don't agree with the poll premise that GIMP is too complicated. It's just that many people would never need it.

toupeiro
January 20th, 2010, 09:29 AM
Very interesting observation.

I suppose that sums up the earlier discussion on how the poll is flawed based on who it's polling.

New Users (the people for which this decision is being made), wouldn't yet know of Ubuntuforums.org and they certainly wouldn't be posting in the subforum for the development version.

But experienced users typically do way more onboarding of new users than other new users and will be the first to get complaints from those new users. I've NEVER gotten complaints about gimp being too difficult to use. Rather, when people start to learn what gimp is, they praise it. That entire logic of experienced users can't bring new user perspective is very broken.

hero1900
January 20th, 2010, 10:13 AM
love gimp i will keep using it

pjc007
January 20th, 2010, 10:56 AM
Jeez how many times do I have to say this? GIMP isn't being removed due to space.

Also I use GIMP far more than F-Spot, but even I understand their reasoning.

If there is no space-constraint that requires GIMP to be removed and replaced by F-Spot, then by all means, let's have both.

Problem solved.

-PJC

pjc007
January 20th, 2010, 11:44 AM
As far as polls goes, typical experience is 3-fold:

1) Those that agree with the result tend to believe that the poll is fairly conducted, and representative of the wishes of the majority.
2) Those that disagree with the result point out that the sample set was too small/wrong/biased, and besides, no poll is valid.
3) Depending on how well the outcome of the poll agrees with the decision being made, those that make the decision will either use the results to support that decision, or agree with group 2, and go ahead regardless.

-PJC

rasmus91
January 20th, 2010, 02:17 PM
just after voting i regretted my vote.

I don't think its a good idea to remove gimp.

Because, gimp is the open source alternative to PS. and if people get unaware of it's existence they will run PS in wine or Dual boot because they need it.

Sure everyone doesn't know how to use GIMP, but they can learn how to use it.

Anyway, i think a simpler photo manager is needed as well. but i wish they didn't take it away.

I love Gimp, it's a piece of masterwork.

Dragonbite
January 20th, 2010, 03:18 PM
I'm beginning to think, with Gimp's new interface (all-in-one, not seperate panels), it will become easier to use and benefit from using.

If Gimp continues on this way, and if there is space, I would hope Lucid or Lucid+n should include it.

Like it was said, if there is no space reason to remove it, then why remove it? Better to provide more options, than to limit the options available out-of-the-box.

IF/when space is the issue, THEN decide whether to keep it or not.

wgray99
January 20th, 2010, 05:50 PM
Please remove all mono tools and apps instead of Gimp.
Also use digikam as the default Album manager - please.
New users are not familiar with what various apps do and therefore
they never get installed later.

If not at least have a special app such as Ubuntu Tweak
that gets installed and activated on first reboot and gives
a series of optional apps/descriptions to install.

Thanks for the 'buntu series.

...w...