GIMP dropped from default Ubuntu 10.04 Lucid Lynx installation


Recommended Posts

Image editing tool GIMP is to be dropped from the default installation of Ubuntu 10.04 Lucid Lynx.

There are a number of reasons cited for this change:

  • the general user doesn?t use it
  • its user-interface is too complex
  • it?s an application for professionals
  • desktop users just want to edit photos and they can do that in F-Spot
  • it?s a photoshop replacement and photoshop isn?t included by default in Windows?
  • it takes up room on the disc

I?m guessing that Ubuntu?s ISO footprint was a big reason for the drop, because the more you add to the OS, the more megabytes are eaten up, and when you need that ISO to fit onto a CD, something might have to give.

I don?t see this being much of a problem though, as it?s a pretty straightforward task to download and install applications. And for those folks that don?t need GIMP, there?s always F-Spot there

Do people use GIMP, or is it too complex?is it too complex?

souricon.gif News source: ZDnet

Lame.

On a side note, and I'm hoping this will turn out to be true, the LTS release might become "rolling", application-wise: click. But all I see is rumours on the site, I'm waiting for something official.

"it?s an application for professionals"

No intention of starting a war here between potential fan boys, but -- I'm kind of laughing my ass off.

Why would a professional use GIMP when there's Photoshop ? After all it isn't very professional using a free software, oh yeah - that's just my opinion, hope that gives me the 50% Flame Resistance I so desperately need.

Oh, and I've never used GIMP, used Paint and Paint.NET.

"it?s an application for professionals"

No intention of starting a war here between potential fan boys, but -- I'm kind of laughing my ass off.

Why would a professional use GIMP when there's Photoshop ? After all it isn't very professional using a free software, oh yeah - that's just my opinion, hope that gives me the 50% Flame Resistance I so desperately need.

Oh, and I've never used GIMP, used Paint and Paint.NET.

It's true though.

That it's an hilarious statement that is, it's nowhere near the level of a professional grade program, one glaring flaw I can think of is the lack of support for CMYK images (although that is changing, slowly)

  • it's a photoshop replacement and photoshop isn't included by default in Windows

what? :rofl:

messenger, MS Office, photo gallery, movie maker, web-server (to name a few) are also not included by default in Windows. Time to drop pidgin, openOffice, apache etc. ?

All other reasons may be valid, I don't really care/know but this one sounds at least a bit dumb.

I use GIMP on both my Linux Laptop, and Windows PC at home and work. The main reason is because if I am working on something a little more complex than paint by itself can handle, it is nic to move it from one system to the other without formating issues...Same for OpenOffice.

It is simple enough to get it from the web so no big deal, just makes more room for linux goodies if it is not included in the distro.

And yet they don't put this stuff in the DVD isos... It's the golden age of broadband, downloading DVD isos isn't uncommon today, they should put more into the DVD iso and promot it more.

Given the amount of CDs that they give out, the financial toll of sending out free DVDs would be too much of a burden.

And there would be outrage of course, if they started charging a fee for burned disks.

Oh well, "photoshop isn?t included by default in Windows"i>... yet I'd bet once the new GIMP with MDI, polaroids and all that stuff gets released they'll add it back.

Anyway GIMP doesn't have to be a direct Photoshop replacement to be still overkill for most users, feature wise, so it makes sense to not put it in the ISOs.

"it?s an application for professionals"

No intention of starting a war here between potential fan boys, but -- I'm kind of laughing my ass off.

Why would a professional use GIMP when there's Photoshop ? After all it isn't very professional using a free software, oh yeah - that's just my opinion, hope that gives me the 50% Flame Resistance I so desperately need.

Oh, and I've never used GIMP, used Paint and Paint.NET.

While I agree that Photoshop is more of a standard in graphic-design circles, I take issue with one thing you said. It is in no way unprofessional to use free software. If someone can accomplish a task with free software that would otherwise be accomplished using for-pay software, and can do it just as well with the free software as with the commercial package, then they have saved themselves or their employers money. To me, that's a very professional thing to do.

I use GIMP all the time at my job for scanning documents and editing/resizing/combining images. I've never had any trouble with it and people are always pleased as punch with the results.

I use GIMP all the time at my job for scanning documents and editing/resizing/combining images. I've never had any trouble with it and people are always pleased as punch with the results.

One could do the same thing with an application as basic as Mac OS X' Preview.

One could do the same thing with an application as basic as Mac OS X' Preview.

Well...yeah, one could. Except I'm not using a Mac there, so...I can't.

I knew of GIMP from before working there, I know its capabilities, I'm familiar with it, so what's the problem?

While I agree that Photoshop is more of a standard in graphic-design circles, I take issue with one thing you said. It is in no way unprofessional to use free software. If someone can accomplish a task with free software that would otherwise be accomplished using for-pay software, and can do it just as well with the free software as with the commercial package, then they have saved themselves or their employers money. To me, that's a very professional thing to do.

I use GIMP all the time at my job for scanning documents and editing/resizing/combining images. I've never had any trouble with it and people are always pleased as punch with the results.

True, it's just the way I think of it, always had for some reason.

I also didn't think about the whole Linux thing, is there even Photoshop available in Linux ? I don't know any other programs that can do photo manipulation other than these 4.. and from first hand experience I only know of GIMP that's for Linux, all others aren't (?).

"it?s an application for professionals"

No intention of starting a war here between potential fan boys, but -- I'm kind of laughing my ass off.

Why would a professional use GIMP when there's Photoshop After all it isn't very professional using a free softwareb>, oh yeah - that's just my opinion, hope that gives me the 50% Flame Resistance I so desperately need.Oh, and I've never used GIMP, used Paint and Paint.NET.b>

I'm also laughing my ass off! You slate the software, but you've NEVER used it! Run that past me again?? And.....why is it not "professional" to use "free" software?

Lucid Lynx

Who comes up with these wacky names?

I would ask the same about the guys who came up with names like: NT4, 95, 98, XP and 7: Not very original would you say? The other way to look at it is, Windows stays Windows and Linux stays Linux, no matter what version it is!:laugh:h:

It's not an app that I'd want to use (yes, I have used it before) simply because I can't stand how it looks.

True, its interface is somewhat misbegotten.

If they got around to creating a decent interface, it would already be much better.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Valve finally confirms Steam Machine prices, starts at $1049 for 512GB option by Pulasthi Ariyasinghe The $1,428 option The Steam Hardware lineup that Valve announced last year is slowly starting to roll out. Following the recent Steam Controller launch, Valve has now confirmed the price of the Steam Machine, its all-in-one console-like solution for PC gaming in the living room. There are currently four variants being presented, with only the storage and the included controller being the biggest differences. All of the Steam Machines have the same internals consisting of a semi-custom AMD Zen 4 CPU with six cores and 12 threads, an RDNA 3 28CU GPU, 16GB of DDR5 memory, and 8GB of GDDR6 VRAM, all inside the familiar box Valve has been showing off for months now. The Steam Machine base model starts at $1,049. This has a 512GB NVMe SSD but does not come with a Steam Controller. Keep in mind that storage can be expanded with the microSD card slot too. Next, the $1,128 model has the exact same storage as the previous one but it does come with the new Steam Controller. If you need the Steam Machine to have more storage for games and apps than that, then the 2TB tiers are also available. The $1,349 Steam Machine has no controller once again, but it does ship with two extra faceplates (red fabric and solid walnut) to replace the standard black one. The final option costs $1,428, and it adds the controller back into the bundle. The Steam Machine ships with the Linux-based SteamOS. The box has a 1 Gigabit Ethernet port, DisplayPort 1.4, and HDMI 2.0, as well as one USB-C and four USB-A ports. Keep in mind that when purchasing standalone, the Steam Controller has a $100 price tag. With the above bundles, that drops to $80. It's a rather expensive machine for the internals it is touting, though the design and small form factor do help it somewhat. However, at the same time, the lack of upgradability hurts it. Valve says the ongoing parts shortages and massive price hikes for memory were the leading causes for this price. "The overall effect is that our original goal for the price of Steam Machine is no longer viable," added the company. "So the prices we're sharing today reflect the state of the world for manufacturing; or, more accurately, it reflects the price of the components as we've secured them over the past 6 months." Valve wants interested gamers to reserve it now to get the chance to pre-order a Steam Machine starting June 25, with shipping starting on June 29. Head here to sign up. The invites to buy it will be sent in a randomized order.
    • What the press release doesn’t mention, however, is how much water the natural gas plant itself will consume, Natural gas plants use about 2,803 gallons of water per megawatt-hour produced, which is significantly less than coal-fired plants that use around 19,185 gallons per megawatt-hour. Overall, natural gas plants are more water-efficient, using 584% less water than traditional power plants on average. AI generated
  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      tuben earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Week One Done
      mnsgroup earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Conversation Starter
      sumytbe earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • One Year In
      B4dM1k3 earned a badge
      One Year In
    • One Year In
      DarkWun earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      513
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      203
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      97
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      82
    5. 5
      neufuse
      67
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!