Google releases Picasa for Mac

[AppleInsider]

After limiting Picasa to Windows and Linux machines, Google on Monday launched a test version of the photo management software for Macs.

The public beta of Picasa 3 is said by the search engine giant to contain virtually the same features as on other operating systems.

Often considered a direct competitor to iPhoto, the suite lets users manage photos and either manually upload or sync them to Picasa Web Albums. It's also possible to share photos through posts on Blogger sites or to create slideshow movies.

Minor, non-destructive direct image editing is also possible, Google says.

The official release confirms recent leaks from sources speaking with AppleInsider but isn't accompanied by any additional information, including any tentative schedule for a final release.

Picasa requires any Intel-based Mac using Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger or higher.

[Not Unlike Myself]

In before lock. Oh wait.. we don't get to play that game anymore.

[OahuSurf]

I think ill just stick to iPhoto.

[Virgil-TB2]

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

After limiting Picasa to Windows and Linux machines, Google on Monday launched a test version of the photo management software for Macs....

Certainly far from the most attractive of apps, which is unusual for an "art" application, but worthy of a tryout perhaps.

I wonder if this is a pre-emptive strike due to Apple possibly releasing a web-enabled new version of iPhoto tomorrow?

[JeffDM]

There are a few features shown in that video that I don't think are offered in Apple's photo management products.

It's a nice option to have. I have Aperture and aspire to jump to Lightroom if Aperture doesn't get some of Lightroom's better features on the next update, so I really won't benefit so much from Picasa.

[kim kap sol]

*frowns in disgust*

Google just...doesn't get it. Waiting all this time for *this* is just a slap in the face.

[amac4me]

Originally Posted by OahuSurf

I think ill just stick to iPhoto.

I think this will be the case for most Mac users.

[alexfischer]

yup. that is one ugly app.

[kim kap sol]

Originally Posted by amac4me

I think this will be the case for most Mac users.

I didn't have to be like this. Google is swimming in cash and developers. Why is it that the companies with the most cash have to produce the most putrid, disgusting app!?

Why is it that tiny team of developers with zero cash can produce amazing Mac apps and the biggest companies produce such garbage!? It simply makes no sense to me.

I can't stand it anymore, I'm utterly disgusted by Microsoft, Adobe and Google.

[whatisgoingon]

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

Picasa requires any Intel-based Mac using Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger or higher.

It sucks that it's intel-only. My Dad could really use it, but he's got a PowerBook released just before the switch to Intels.

And the scrollbar in it feels weird. I switch they had stuck to the standard scrollbar instead.

[bdkennedy1]

And it looks like a Windows or Linux app. Yuk.

[astrosmash]

Picasa is first and foremost a Windows applications. Google used WineLib to port Picasa to Linux, so they must have used WineLib to do the Mac Port as well. That's important because WineLib used to require X11 for its GUI support. Obviously Google has added native OS X display support to WineLib, which is great news.

The app itself appears to work just as well as the Windows version, doesn't look terribly out of place on the OS X desktop, and absolutely destroys iPhoto in the speed and memory usage department.

Both Picasa and iPhoto have their own set of features they do extra well. I find I miss iPhoto when I use Picasa, and I miss Picasa when I'm in iPhoto. It's definitely nice to have the option to use both. Extra nice that Picasa works with my existing iPhoto library.

All in all, very nice work.

[TBell]

WIth the exception of Sketch Up, Google's Application business seemingly exists mostly to further cement it 's leadership in Search. I doubt Google would try to make a serious contender to iPhoto because there is no money in it. If there were, it would risk annoying Apple.

iPhoto for most people is free and it is a pretty good application. WHy spend money on replacing that? I think most of Google's applications are for the most part the work of what developers do in their company paid free time.

Originally Posted by kim kap sol

I didn't have to be like this. Google is swimming in cash and developers. Why is it that the companies with the most cash have to produce the most putrid, disgusting app!?

Why is it that tiny team of developers with zero cash can produce amazing Mac apps and the biggest companies produce such garbage!? It simply makes no sense to me.

I can't stand it anymore, I'm utterly disgusted by Microsoft, Adobe and Google.

[Wiggin]

What they really should have done was create a better Picasa upload plugin for iPhoto. The current one is very limited. I played around a little with Picasa on Windows only becuase I wanted to upload videos to my Picasa album and there was no way to do that from a Mac. It was a very jarring experience compared to using iPhoto.

Google gains nothing by making a Mac photo management application. It's the online albums where they get the visibility. The more people posting online to Picasa, the more visitors they'll get which will turn into more Picasa users and therefore more useres of Google's other online tools. They'd be much better off making it easier for iPhoto users to get their photos and videos online to Picasa rather than trying to get them to switch photo management applications.

[Lorre]

It's a pretty nice looking app... if this were Linux or Windows.

Jeez, could an app look any less OSX-like? Even stuff like NetBeans and Eclipse, that look virtually identical to their Windows and Linux counterparts, look more native than this.

[kim kap sol]

Originally Posted by astrosmash

All in all, very nice work.

You gotta be shittin' me.

[jnoel]

My biggest gripe as of late with OS X (really iPhoto i guess) was the lack of ability to have a central network repository for photos that all the clients on a network could view. This "gotta import the files into the iPhoto DB or have locally stuff just blows.

This made my night!

[JeffDM]

I've downloaded the app. I don't really like the scrolling function. In many ways, Picasa is quicker and has a more deterministic feel to the controls than iPhoto offers, except for that goofy scroller. Start Picasa and it opens right away with much less delay. Going to the single image view mode just happens rather than make me wait, I can switch photos nearly instantaneously rather than see a low res preview and wait seconds for the full image. I didn't expect to see performance like that. It's still indexing photos, it's at 22,000 photos and still feeling quite snappy.

It actually offers to let you do something with geotag data.

To be frank, the vehement complaints about the appearance sound more than just a little overboard to me.

[Virgil-TB2]

Originally Posted by astrosmash

Picasa is first and foremost a Windows applications. ... All in all, very nice work.

I disagree.

I'm going to try it anyway, but I agree with the poster that was griping about how it seems impossible for the bigger companies to do quality work. When you look at some of the apps made for the iPhone in a very short time they all look like gold-plated miracles next to this thing.

How is it that one of the richest software companies in the world with the best developers can't spend the time to use X-Code and Cocoa and turn out a "real" OS-X app?

If this was Microsoft's half-hearted attempt at cross platform compatibility I would understand. They are direct competitors, they have a different culture (i.e. - no culture), and they generally make crap software anyway. Google is supposedly none of those things, yet they toss this thing out decades late, and ugly as well? This is sounding disturbingly similar to the fiasco of "development" that led to Chrome.

More and more I think that Google really needs a shake up in it's corporate culture. The place must be almost completely staffed by slackers at this point. Creative types need to be able to goof off at work, but they also need to, you know ... work sometimes.

[digitalclips]

Originally Posted by OahuSurf

I think ill just stick to iPhoto.

Yep. This is surely for PC users who have no clue how great iLife is.

[digitalclips]

Originally Posted by JeffDM

I've downloaded the app. I don't really like the scrolling function. In many ways, Picasa is quicker and has a more deterministic feel to the controls than iPhoto offers, except for that goofy scroller. Start Picasa and it opens right away with much less delay. Going to the single image view mode just happens rather than make me wait, I can switch photos nearly instantaneously rather than see a low res preview and wait seconds for the full image. I didn't expect to see performance like that. It's still indexing photos, it's at 22,000 photos and still feeling quite snappy.

It actually offers to let you do something with geotag data.

To be frank, the vehement complaints about the appearance sound more than just a little overboard to me.

Interface aside, and I have no idea yet but does it totally and seamlessly integrate with Aperture, iMovie, iWeb, Pages etc.?

[astrosmash]

Originally Posted by Virgil-TB2

I disagree.

I'm going to try it anyway

Pretty difficult to make a judgement when you haven't even tried it. I challenge anyone to show me a better Windows-to-Mac port than this Picasa, and like I said it absolutely destroys iPhoto when it comes to performance and memory usage. And it's still only in Beta (there are rough edges)

There are a lot of people moving from Windows to OS X, and Picasa is often cited as the Windows software they miss the most. I don't think any of those people will think Picasa looks ugly or out of place. I think a lot of those people will have trouble moving to iPhoto if Picasa is available.


There's certainly no shortage of people who will say this looks different that a typical OS X and judge it solely on that rather than the actual merits of software. There isn't anything Google can do for those people. Like Steve Jobs said, "If you look backward in this business, you’ll be crushed. You have to look forward."

[frugality]

Too many people here are too quick to automatically poo-poo anything that's not Apple.

Options are good.

If you don't like Picasa, then don't use it. Simple as that.

[g3pro]

Thankfully he mac will have a free alternative to the steaming pile of sh*t that comes bundled on the mac. Picasa is a welcome improvement from iPhoto hell.


"Events" in iPhoto is the stupidest implementation of photo sorting I have ever seen. It is incredibly broken and useless for organizing the photos on my computer.

[JeffDM]

Originally Posted by digitalclips

Interface aside, and I have no idea yet but does it totally and seamlessly integrate with Aperture, iMovie, iWeb, Pages etc.?

Apparently, it doesn't, but that's not a consideration for my needs. Heck, I'm a lot more deliberate than that. Just indiscriminantly dragging and dropping photos tends to lead to needlessly huge files, so I tend to export a reduced size image that hits target needs right away. iDVD would probably scale the output, but a PDF print of Pages could net me the equivalent of 1200 pixels per inch images, meaning huge files and really slowing down processing and printing in a needless way when 300 does the job just as well for image quality and works much faster.

[winterspan]

Some of you need to quit complaining.. Its free for god sakes! I don't know about the OSX version, but the XP version is great, particularly for novice users (like your mom). It comes with a built-in shell viewer which is leagues ahead of the normal "windows picture viewer" thing you get when you double click a photo in XP.

I obviously still use Photoshop, but Picasa works great as an photo organizer, particularly if you use it's built-in "Picasa Web Albums" feature.. very easy to share pics with friends and family members.

[Virgil-TB2]

Originally Posted by astrosmash

Pretty difficult to make a judgement when you haven't even tried it. I challenge anyone to show me a better Windows-to-Mac port than this Picasa, ...

Well, I pretty much indicated that I was judging it on it's appearance and on the brief info we have and that despite it's ugliness I was willing to try it anyway to see if it's (possibly) fabulous functionality made it's appearance and layout any more palatable. I think that's eminently fair. Most people who were initially turned off by the way something appears, would look no further than that.

You also miss my point entirely. I didn't say this was a bad port of a Windows product, I said I would prefer it if it wasn't a port at all, and I didn't understand why a company with Googles resources can't do cross platform development and has to rely on ports (that are late).

[Virgil-TB2]

Originally Posted by astrosmash

... There's certainly no shortage of people who will say this looks different that a typical OS X and judge it solely on that rather than the actual merits of software. There isn't anything Google can do for those people. ...

OMG I missed this part.

This has to be the dumbest statement ever. Nothing that Google can do? Couldn't they, you know ... make a native app?

I mean sure, it's not *that* ugly and if iPhoto wasn't around as an alternative, I would probably use it. iPhoto is far from perfect itself.

The point is though there is a long tradition of making apps "look right" on the OS that they are made for. To use the natural look and feel of the OS. It also makes a lot of sense from a design point of view. Probably too much ink has been spent on this minor topic already, but there is no way is it not a valid criticism of the app that it has no "native" look and feel. Google just didn't care about that I guess.

It's their decision, but I have a right to my reaction to it.

[Dragaroo]

Picasa does not move or reorganize your image files.

Sold.

As someone who brings in gigs of photos onto a MacBook each week, iPhoto just doesn't make sense. If you're not serious enough to pony up for a full professional ($$$) photo suite and not interested in hacks to manage multiple photo libraries using iPhoto's black box means of file storage, that is reason enough to give it a shot.

Seriously, this is one of the few remaining apps I power up my Windows desktop for. Don't be so quick to dismiss it.

[pt123]

Some people will complain about anything that isn't from Apple. I think Picasa for the Mac is awesome and looks great. And it is going to get better.

[hmurchison]

Originally Posted by frugality

Too many people here are too quick to automatically poo-poo anything that's not Apple.

Options are good.

If you don't like Picasa, then don't use it. Simple as that.

Yeah but they can still comment on whether they like it or not.

I mean let's face it 3 years ago Picasa was arguably better looking than iPhoto. Now iPhoto
makes Picasa look like some sort of sourceforge project. I guess it speaks volumes to Apple's design ethos.

[Cubert]

Better late than never.

[ruidoso48]

Originally Posted by hmurchison

Yeah but they can still comment on whether they like it or not.

I mean let's face it 3 years ago Picasa was arguably better looking than iPhoto. Now iPhoto
makes Picasa look like some sort of sourceforge project. I guess it speaks volumes to Apple's design ethos.

I wouldn't call Picasa a sourceforge project (Ouch!). I use Picasa at work on Windows to organize tens of thousands of photos for enforcement cases and it is quick, integrates beautifully with Outlook and is efficient. And there is no denying the speed of this app on my iMac. iPhoto has never has this kind of speed. As far as it being not Mac like, well just look at the debacle that is Office 2008 and its beginnings where the beta testers had the same complaint that the ribbon sucked, etc. and MS changed it and tried to make it more "Mac like" --and failed miserably IMHO. It took me no time to get used to the ribbon and I sure wish that MS would have incorporated the look and feel of Office 2007 in Office 2008. Office 2008 is totally inferior to Office 2007. Point being not all "ports" should be discounted just because they are.

[Obi-Wan Kubrick]

I will probably be switching over to Picasa if iPhoto continues to run agonizingly slow after I rebuild it tomorrow.

[BenRoethig]

Originally Posted by digitalclips

Yep. This is surely for PC users who have no clue how great iLife is.

By great you mean slow, not integrated with finder, and lacking in editing features compared to other free photo editing apps?

[cameronj]

Originally Posted by Virgil-TB2

OMG I missed this part.

This has to be the dumbest statement ever. Nothing that Google can do? Couldn't they, you know ... make a native app?

I mean sure, it's not *that* ugly and if iPhoto wasn't around as an alternative, I would probably use it. iPhoto is far from perfect itself.

The point is though there is a long tradition of making apps "look right" on the OS that they are made for. To use the natural look and feel of the OS. It also makes a lot of sense from a design point of view. Probably too much ink has been spent on this minor topic already, but there is no way is it not a valid criticism of the app that it has no "native" look and feel. Google just didn't care about that I guess.

It's their decision, but I have a right to my reaction to it.

Fascinating. Ever seen itunes or safari for windows?

[initiator]

Originally Posted by frugality

Too many people here are too quick to automatically poo-poo anything that's not Apple.

Options are good.

If you don't like Picasa, then don't use it. Simple as that.

I couldn't agree more. My only complaint is that it requires an Intel CPU. My poor G4 Mac mini...left in the cold.

[MacTel]

Originally Posted by ruidoso48

I wouldn't call Picasa a sourceforge project (Ouch!). I use Picasa at work on Windows to organize tens of thousands of photos for enforcement cases and it is quick, integrates beautifully with Outlook and is efficient. And there is no denying the speed of this app on my iMac. iPhoto has never has this kind of speed. As far as it being not Mac like, well just look at the debacle that is Office 2008 and its beginnings where the beta testers had the same complaint that the ribbon sucked, etc. and MS changed it and tried to make it more "Mac like" --and failed miserably IMHO. It took me no time to get used to the ribbon and I sure wish that MS would have incorporated the look and feel of Office 2007 in Office 2008. Office 2008 is totally inferior to Office 2007. Point being not all "ports" should be discounted just because they are.

I would only use this if the Picasa photo sharing is free. If they are going to index my photos and push ads in my face then free sounds about right. I would prefer it over MobileMe.

[ApplePi]

I've been waiting for Picasa to come to mac. This is a glorious day!

I don't know what the heck you guys are spewing about iPhoto. It pales in comparison to Picasa. Picasa is so much more logically organized.

[dudemac]

I just don't understand all the complaints about the interface. It was designed at least 8 years ago before Google ever bought the company. This software is not Googles. I happen to think it works rather well. In fact Aperture borrows the shuttle button for scrolling. Which was really handy when we all didn't have scroll wheels on every mouse.

Picasa for mac will not replace iPhoto and probably should not. However it does some things much better than iPhoto.
1. Watched folders. You never need to tell it to import images that are in a watched folder. It will just add them every time you put images in the folder.
2. There is not one huge database file. Admittedly iPhoto does allow storage of photo's outside the database now, but the database file still stores all the duplicates and thumbnails. With Picasa you can sort your photo's into folder where ever you want.
3. Speed. Even the "pro" apps are not very good in this regard. I have used Lightroom, Aperture, iView(which is now expressioin media), and iPhoto. I have even tried a couple of other PC apps just to see how they handle a large number of pictures and all seem really slow compared to Picasa. And what is a large number.... anything over 10,000 images is pushing the limits of most other programs. Not just scrolling and viewing, but searching.

If anything Picasa is really a great compliment to iPhoto. I will be using it to catalog my images. I will continue to use iPhoto for books and calendars and my .Me galleries, but since I have such a large number of images on external drives. Picasa will be the go to software for cataloging.

thedude