Picasa is so much better than iPhoto

123468

Comments

  • Reply 101 of 150
    maccrazymaccrazy Posts: 2,658member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Gene Clean

    And your point? It's not $400, but it's $350. So?



    When you compare applications, it is necessary to compare them on equal grounds. Extras that will run you $400 give an advantage to app A, therefore making the comparison pointless.




    Why are you telling me this? I don't think .Mac and AppleCare have anything to do with the purchase of Aperture. Especially not the AppleCare.



    Aperture has not been designed for consumers to backup their photos (i know this is a feature). The program is to provide a slick workflow for RAW.
  • Reply 102 of 150
    Quote:

    Originally posted by MacCrazy

    Why are you telling me this? I don't think .Mac and AppleCare have anything to do with the purchase of Aperture. Especially not the AppleCare.



    Aperture has not been designed for consumers to backup their photos (i know this is a feature). The program is to provide a slick workflow for RAW.




    Um, dude, we were talking about Picasa. I mentioned Aperture because the price of backup for Picasa + support for Picasa was almost as high as what Apple charge for Aperture.
  • Reply 103 of 150
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Gene Clean

    Um, dude, we were talking about Picasa. I mentioned Aperture because the price of backup for Picasa + support for Picasa was almost as high as what Apple charge for Aperture.



    you keep forgetting you get a lot more than support and backup for iPhoto by purchasing Applecare and .Mac



    Also, you can get free support (technical and creative) for iPhoto at Apple retail stores.



    And Picasa lacks many of the features of iPhoto and there's no way to add them (e.g., OS X and iLife integration, libary sharing between users and macs). At least the backup feature "missing" in iPhoto are available for the price of .Mac or probably other cheaper backup software for the mac (because, as we know, it's so hard to move an iPhoto library to a disk for backup).
  • Reply 104 of 150
    Quote:

    Originally posted by cesjr

    [B]you keep forgetting you get a lot more than support and backup for iPhoto by purchasing Applecare and .Mac



    Maybe I don't want to get 'a lot more'. Maybe I just want to backup my photos.



    Quote:

    Also, you can get free support (technical and creative) for iPhoto at Apple retail stores.



    Oh yes. Let me put on my shoes, I gotta travel 15 miles to ask a simple question.



    Quote:

    And Picasa lacks many of the features of iPhoto and there's no way to add them (e.g., OS X and iLife integration, libary sharing between users and macs).



    Um, Picasa is for Windows so I don't see how you can say Picasa lacks OS X integration, when it doesn't even exist for OS X.



    Quote:

    At least the backup feature "missing" in iPhoto are available for the price of .Mac or probably other cheaper backup software for the mac (because, as we know, it's so hard to move an iPhoto library to a disk for backup).



    If you had read the thread, you would know that moving an iPhoto library to a disk doesn't work because when you restore those photos, all metadata is lost.



    So no, it doesn't work, and those features are missing in iPhoto. Not to mention that it's dog slow too. But you wouldn't care. 'Cause you can get speed by buying a $3000 Quad PowerMac, right?
  • Reply 105 of 150
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Gene Clean

    Maybe I don't want to get 'a lot more'. Maybe I just want to backup my photos.







    Oh yes. Let me put on my shoes, I gotta travel 15 miles to ask a simple question.







    Um, Picasa is for Windows so I don't see how you can say Picasa lacks OS X integration, when it doesn't even exist for OS X.







    If you had read the thread, you would know that moving an iPhoto library to a disk doesn't work because when you restore those photos, all metadata is lost.



    So no, it doesn't work, and those features are missing in iPhoto. Not to mention that it's dog slow too. But you wouldn't care. 'Cause you can get speed by buying a $3000 Quad PowerMac, right?




    You can always use this free program - http://www.grapefruit.ch/iBackup/



    Also, I'm not sure what you're talking about when you say you lose the metadata. I've had my OS X system go down on a few macs, where I had to rebuild the startup disk and in those instances I recreated the user accounts and reconstituted the Pictures folder for each user with their iPhoto library folder (extracted from the disk before I zeroed it and reinstalled OS X - by the way I don't do this anymore because I use Carbon Copy Cloner and keep a copy of the drive). After putting the iPhoto library folder into the pictures folder, I launched iPhoto and everything was there. So what are you talking about?



    Second, Picasa has NO option other than your typically lame email support. Honestly, you're better off with user forums than email support. User forums exist for iPhoto at apple and at other sites. Now if you want real phone support, you get it for a free period with a mac or iLife purchase, which you can extend to three years by buying an extended hardware warranty (applecare) which is a good idea anyways and isn't even that expensive. Plus you can go to an Apple retail store - no such option for Picasa. Thus, overall, iPhoto has vastly superior support compared to the lame, email only support for Picasa.



    As far as Picasa not existing for OS X, well, people are claiming photo organizing/editing is better on Picasa despite that fact. That's the whole point of this thread, despite no OS X version of Picasa. So I guess what people are saying is photo organizing/editing on a PC with Picasa is better than the experience on a mac with iPhoto. This is wrong for several reasons, including the fact that iPhoto has awesome integration with its OS and other apps that Picasa totally lacks.



    I disagree with dog slow. Works fine on my 867 powerbook and even better on our iMac G5. Speed is not everything anyways.



  • Reply 106 of 150
    maccrazymaccrazy Posts: 2,658member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Gene Clean

    Um, dude, we were talking about Picasa. I mentioned Aperture because the price of backup for Picasa + support for Picasa was almost as high as what Apple charge for Aperture.



    Right, sorry I'm subscribed to too many threads.



    If you want backup in iPhoto it is a problem - I expect this will be solved in iLife '06. I may wait till then before ordering Aperture to see what features they add. I can understand mentioning .Mac but AppleCare still seems a little irrelevant when compared to Picasa!



    Edit: .Mac has, however, just been beefed up so maybe Apple will not add backup - this would be a shame as .Mac is very expensive for what it provides. As far as I'm concerned I used it for a year and only really used e-mail and occasionally the iDisk and Synchronising.
  • Reply 107 of 150
    Quote:

    Originally posted by cesjr



    Number 1, Picasa has nothing like iPhoto's integration with OS X and iLife (and increasingly third party apps). I love being able to add a photo to my iPhoto library right from within an email window in OS X Mail (or right click on a photo in Safari and save it to iPhoto). Or choosing an iPhoto library to use as my desktop background from System Preferences.




    From outlook and outlook express, IE and Firefox pictures are saved to the "My pictures" directory by default. This is also the default location that Picasa stores and looks for photos. When Picasa is open, those photos are automatically read. Virtually any app that uses photos goes to the My Pictures directory by default. You don't get the smooth scrolling and dynamic thumbnails from the Picasa GUI, but the photos are right there and easy to find. You can also set the desktop background from inside Picasa, any folder in the windows explorer or the display properties screen shows you the "My pictures" folder by default.



    Quote:



    Frankly, I think the way Picasa grabs photos from all over your drive is a bad idea because what happens if some folder gets deleted. Better to have the photos in a central place (and where they can't get mucked with).




    I think a centralized place is a good idea too. By default Picasa will only look inside "My documents". It is fun to turn on whole-disk-crawling to find pics in nooks I had forgotten about or never knew I had. I move them to a safe place myself, but it's easy to backup what's in Picasa's library.



    Quote:



    Number 5, the way you can make the thumbnails bigger and smaller in iPhoto is really slick.




    One click in Picasa, easy and smooth even on my box.

    Quote:

    Oh, I forgot another reason why iPhoto is better than Picasa - Rendevous sharing of photo libraries among user accounts on the same mac and macs on your home network.



    Again not in Picasa, but you can share photos (or any file) with multiple users and across the network from any Windows Explorer directory in one click. I know some people are putting a lot of weight into "IPhoto Integration", but I don't see a need to reinvent the wheel.
  • Reply 108 of 150
    Quote:

    Originally posted by xmoger

    From outlook and outlook express, IE and Firefox pictures are saved to the "My pictures" directory by default. This is also the default location that Picasa stores and looks for photos. When Picasa is open, those photos are automatically read. Virtually any app that uses photos goes to the My Pictures directory by default. You don't get the smooth scrolling and dynamic thumbnails from the Picasa GUI, but the photos are right there and easy to find. You can also set the desktop background from inside Picasa, any folder in the windows explorer or the display properties screen shows you the "My pictures" folder by default.





    I think a centralized place is a good idea too. By default Picasa will only look inside "My documents". It is fun to turn on whole-disk-crawling to find pics in nooks I had forgotten about or never knew I had. I move them to a safe place myself, but it's easy to backup what's in Picasa's library.



    One click in Picasa, easy and smooth even on my box.

    Again not in Picasa, but you can share photos (or any file) with multiple users and across the network from any Windows Explorer directory in one click. I know some people are putting a lot of weight into "IPhoto Integration", but I don't see a need to reinvent the wheel.




    There's no iMovie or iDVD type integration (which iPhoto has had for years now) or third party app integration, which is the biggest thing.



    I also think saving to, or selecting from a default folder in a directory is less intuitive. It's obviously not a problem for people that are knowledgeable about computers, but some people don't grasp the hierarchical file system (for example, my mom never has).



    Same thing with sharing photos via a directory over a network. This is a geek exercise. For ordinary folks, there's too many steps and few people actually know how to do this, whereas with iPhoto it's brain dead simple.



    As for the thumbnails in Picasa, I didn't think there were infinitely scable like in iPhoto, all at the same time, using a simple slider at the bottom. Someone else here agreed with me on this, though maybe we're wrong.
  • Reply 109 of 150
    kickahakickaha Posts: 8,760member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by xmoger

    I know some people are putting a lot of weight into "IPhoto Integration", but I don't see a need to reinvent the wheel.



    Precisely my feeling on archiving of photos from within the app.
  • Reply 110 of 150
    The way I see it currently is that Apple doesn't want to step on developer's toes...so they sell iPhoto with iLife now. This is Google's opportunity to port Picasa to Mac (if people really do hate iPhoto, Google could have something big on their hands.) But if they don't take this opportunity, one day Apple may simply allow free updates to iPhoto and developers will have missed their chance.
  • Reply 111 of 150
    gongon Posts: 2,437member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by cesjr

    Lack of one feature some people want (restore from backup) does not a better program Picassa make. (Especially when apple in fact offers this, you just have to pay for that - in .mac)



    I'm not saying anything about Picasa, I haven't even used it. I'm also not saying Apple should put an explicit backup feature in iPhoto. There's no need to put the kitchen sink in every app.



    I had the iPhoto Library folder copied whole, and could not restore it to working condition even with help from Applecare. This makes iPhoto utterly, completely useless because I can't trust it to keep my data. That was my point.
  • Reply 112 of 150
    maccrazymaccrazy Posts: 2,658member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Gon

    I'm not saying anything about Picasa, I haven't even used it. I'm also not saying Apple should put an explicit backup feature in iPhoto. There's no need to put the kitchen sink in every app.



    I had the iPhoto Library folder copied whole, and could not restore it to working condition even with help from Applecare. This makes iPhoto utterly, completely useless because I can't trust it to keep my data. That was my point.




    I've backed up my hardrive multiple times and have restored from the iPhoto Library in the pictures folder with no problems. Your problem sounds odd.
  • Reply 113 of 150
    MacCrazy:



    there is an issue with restoring photos - see my earlier posts.



    Kickaha:



    I have to disagree with you on the backup/archive point. As I mentioned before, iPhoto is different from most other apps (for typical home use) in that when you download a picture into it that is the only place it exists. A HD failure will lose all your precious snaps. Other apps, such as iTunes, Word, Excel, will also lose their data but I'd argue in a typical home environment that loss isn't catastrophic.



    Spreadsheets can be rebuilt. Letters re typed. Even thesis can be redone (OK,OK, I realise it's hard, but it isn't the end of the world). But a photo cannot be recreated.



    So for me a backup routine within iPhoto is almost a neccesity, not a nice to have.



    Plus it would be nice to have a great Apple interface. At the moment I use Silverkeeper, which isn't bad. But it isn't great, either.



    David



    PS I accept your point about bloatware, but would it really be so bad to have an extra menu item under Services called backup, that goes to a standard app from whichever app you call it? So iPhoto could be set to backup every time a new picture is added or amended, whilst iTunes could be set to a weekly/monthly backup etc etc.
  • Reply 114 of 150
    kickahakickaha Posts: 8,760member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by iMac David

    Kickaha:



    I have to disagree with you on the backup/archive point. As I mentioned before, iPhoto is different from most other apps (for typical home use) in that when you download a picture into it that is the only place it exists. A HD failure will lose all your precious snaps. Other apps, such as iTunes, Word, Excel, will also lose their data but I'd argue in a typical home environment that loss isn't catastrophic.



    Spreadsheets can be rebuilt. Letters re typed. Even thesis can be redone (OK,OK, I realise it's hard, but it isn't the end of the world). But a photo cannot be recreated.



    So for me a backup routine within iPhoto is almost a neccesity, not a nice to have.



    Plus it would be nice to have a great Apple interface. At the moment I use Silverkeeper, which isn't bad. But it isn't great, either.





    *beats head against wall*



    So basically what you're saying is that you want to be able to back up your important files. Which is what *existing* backup solutions offer. There is *no reason* to slap a backup feature into an app. None. Nada. Zip. Use a backup application, and use it regularly. Done.



    Adding redundant features to multiple apps, so that each app does it a *little* differently is the hallmark of lousy design. cf: MS.
  • Reply 115 of 150
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Kickaha

    Adding redundant features to multiple apps, so that each app does it a *little* differently is the hallmark of lousy design. cf: MS.



    You're talking out of your ass now. No MS consumer app has any backup feature. As a matter of fact, their OS ships with a separate backup program, unlike OS X.



    So out of the box, OS X offers no backup app, and it offers no way to backup your important photos from within iPhoto. Now that's bad design.
  • Reply 116 of 150
    maccrazymaccrazy Posts: 2,658member
    Backup options are tricky. MS have preferences for similar things everywhere making using a computer confusing. Yet a centralised solution is annoying if you want to change the preferences for an individual app.



    To be honest the best back-up solution should be one app which has different preferences for different apps. This SHOULD be included OS X. However then customers will complain it's not heave duty enough. I think Apple should release backup as part of iLife and not .Mac.
  • Reply 117 of 150
    kickahakickaha Posts: 8,760member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Gene Clean

    You're talking out of your ass now. No MS consumer app has any backup feature. As a matter of fact, their OS ships with a separate backup program, unlike OS X.



    Gene, try to start thinking less pedantically, and more abstractly.



    Read what I wrote. Specifically, read the exact sentence you quoted. Does it mention backup? No. It states that adding features, NO MATTER WHAT FEATURE, to many applications, when that feature is best pulled out into a central app with a unified approach, is a bad idea.



    That is what adding backup to iPhoto would do, and all it would accomplish. It's a bad idea.



    As I've stated before, if you'll look back, I think that adding an *archiving* feature would be very good. But a *backup*? No. It's just redundant and bad design.



    Quote:

    So out of the box, OS X offers no backup app, and it offers no way to backup your important photos from within iPhoto. Now that's bad design.



    Most new users drag and drop, or burn to CD. I agree that the Backup app that is currently part of .Mac should be made part of the standard install, no question about it. Personally, I use rsync, which *IS* included by default, but not everyone is comfortable using the command line. There are about a dozen third party apps that range from free to $99, however, until Apple chooses to bundle Backup.



    (Wait... I thought you didn't *like* it when Apple wrote all the apps? Silly me.)



    The sticking point you are failing to see is that adding backup to within an app is just a bad idea when there are much better solutions already lying around, many for free.



    Hell, here's a script to backup a user's iPhoto Library to a hard drive named PhotoBackup, free of charge:



    #!\\bin\\sh

    rsync --archive --update --relative --showtogo "~/Pictures/iPhoto Library" "/Volumes/PhotoBackup"



    There. Cut and paste that into a TextEdit window, make it plain text, and save as BackupPhotos.sh. Get that .sh ending on there. Now double-click it in the Finder, and it'll do it's mojo. Done. You'll always have a working mirror of your photo directory.
  • Reply 118 of 150
    maccrazymaccrazy Posts: 2,658member
    Kickaha your brain really is hung like a horse.
  • Reply 119 of 150
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Kickaha

    [B]Gene, try to start thinking less pedantically, and more abstractly.



    Start writing more pedantically, and less abstractly.



    Quote:

    Read what I wrote. Specifically, read the exact sentence you quoted. Does it mention backup? No.



    Therefore, it's off-topic.



    Quote:

    It states that adding features, NO MATTER WHAT FEATURE, to many applications, when that feature is best pulled out into a central app with a unified approach, is a bad idea.



    Except that the much-talked about 'central app' is, mysteriously missing.



    Quote:

    That is what adding backup to iPhoto would do, and all it would accomplish. It's a bad idea.



    I disagree.



    Quote:

    As I've stated before, if you'll look back, I think that adding an *archiving* feature would be very good. But a *backup*? No. It's just redundant and bad design.



    Um, this is semantics. You're basically saying the same thing.





    Quote:

    Most new users drag and drop, or burn to CD. I agree that the Backup app that is currently part of .Mac should be made part of the standard install, no question about it. Personally, I use rsync, which *IS* included by default, but not everyone is comfortable using the command line. There are about a dozen third party apps that range from free to $99, however, until Apple chooses to bundle Backup.



    A modern (2005) OS should include a backup app.





    Quote:

    (Wait... I thought you didn't *like* it when Apple wrote all the apps? Silly me.)



    Um. I suppose you think you're being sarcastic? Not funny. A backup app is *necessary* out-of-the box. A broadband tuner is not.



    Quote:

    The sticking point you are failing to see is that adding backup to within an app is just a bad idea when there are much better solutions already lying around, many for free.



    Oh, such as Backup from .Mac?



    Quote:

    Hell, here's a script to backup a user's iPhoto Library to a hard drive named PhotoBackup, free of charge:



    #!\\bin\\sh

    rsync --archive --update --relative --showtogo "~/Pictures/iPhoto Library" "/Volumes/PhotoBackup"



    You don't need to write scripts for me. You're not dealing with an amateur here.



    Yet I fail to see how this is a better solution than a dedicated button in iPhoto (Gasp! One button more!)





    Quote:

    There. Cut and paste that into a TextEdit window, make it plain text, and save as BackupPhotos.sh. Get that .sh ending on there. Now double-click it in the Finder, and it'll do it's mojo. Done. You'll always have a working mirror of your photo directory.



    And this is better than adding a backup feature to iPhoto... how?



    Anyway... I digress. I guess Google is not as smart as that, for they include a backup option in their program. Oh well. They don't know good design, anyways..
  • Reply 120 of 150
    maccrazymaccrazy Posts: 2,658member
    Guys can we calm it. Apple told us in 1984 we should forget command-line and yet in 2005 there is more need for it than ever before in OS X. I want a fully GUI OS. Apple should include backup - they do not. Is this really the only feature that Picasa offers that iPhoto does not. Also iLife '06 will be out in a month - let's just wait and see if it includes a backup function.
Sign In or Register to comment.