Picasa for Mac and FileMaker Pro 10 Released

[Gerwin]

Picassa is a nice program, but I will not be installing any Google software for a while. Every time you install something Google, my computer gets filled up with new updater garbage that continuously runs in the background without me being informed about it. I get popups from that, giving me non informative information about failed updates for programs that I don't use. Google is more evil than Windows in this respect. I think I spent half an hour yesterday to remove all Google stuff that was running in the background without me knowing about it. It was everywhere. In my Library, in the systems Library, in my preferences, in Safari's plugins, in my launchdemons, in the system's launchdemons.
I really wish I could remove the Google search window from Safari.

 

[lamadude]

I guess there's my answer....emulated code. That's FAR WORSE than even Cider's method.

It's not "emulated code" Wine is not an emulator (that is even what the acronym "WINE" stands for) It is a compatibility layer, read the wine wikipedia article for more info. You're not running windows in the background like you would with virtualization programs or emulators. Also it's clearly not "FAR WORSE" than cider since it's the exact same technology.

 

[lamadude]

Can you cite a source for this information, please? I took a look in the Picasa package and it looks like a normal Mac application to me. I'm not a coder though, so I might not know what to look for.

It is a normal mac application in the sense that you can just drag it to your apps folder and it works. However this does not mean it's not using wine technology.
I can't be 100% sure that it uses wine, but I am 99% sure, it hasn't changed any interface elements and but it looks exactly the same as picasa for linux which is definitely wine based. Also, google has put a lot of resources into improving wine with the exact purpose of making it support picasa 3.

On a side note (in general, not directed to you bwanderson) I think the mac "purists" on this forum should give picasa a chance, and not dismiss it because it uses some technology they barely understand.If the program works, and is fast, and it does a great job of managing your photo library, why would anyone care what technology it uses? Of course, if you don't like picasa by all means don't use it, but if you only don't like it "because it uses wine" that is a very silly reason IMO.

 

[bananas]

There seems to be a few .exe files under the Picasa folder, so it probably is indeed done with wine.

/Applications/Picasa.app//Contents/Resources/cdautorun/PicasaCD.exe
/Applications/Picasa.app//Contents/Resources/cdautorun/PicasaRestore.exe
/Applications/Picasa.app//Contents/Resources/cdautorun/setup.exe

 

[Superdelphinus]

Firefox isn't the same on the mac as it is on the PC at all. Well, it's the same in every way except that the scrolling is totally fcked and annoying and so i have to use safari instead

 

[xUKHCx]

In Picasa for the Mac, you can move pictures into new folders (right or option click after selecting pictures, select "Move to New Folder") , and entire folders (right or option click on the folder, select "Move Folder"). And you can also delete pictures (right click, select "Delete from Disk").

You are misunderstanding me, I want Picasa to move all my photos I import into it to a central location like iPhoto does by default. This way I don't have to worry when using my computer if a file is in my photo library or not because I know that if it is there it is not. With the current way that Picasa is set up I would have to check. Afterall nobody wants every single picture on their computer inside Picasa.

I'd like to try Picasa for Mac (iPhoto '06 is feeling slow and out-dated) so I started to install it, but I cancelled when it asked me for my admin password.

Since switching to Mac I've come to hate "windows style" installation wizards that require admin privs to complete the install. Why can't I just drag and drop the Picasa icon to the Desktop and run it? I hate the thought that junk is being installed in folders all over my system. And since there's no real "uninstaller", I'll never get rid of it all if I don't want to keep the app.

Come on, google, be a good Mac citizen and provide a drag-and-drop-the-icon installation.

Picasa is drag and drop install It might ask for you admin password if you are not an admin and are trying to place it in the applications folder. Or if you are installing the Picasa web albums plugin for iPhoto as it is a plugin that directly works within iPhoto so needs higher privilidges for the install.

Where is Google Chrome?

It has taken forever for them to develop a version for Mac.

QUite a few people have said this but you need to remember that (Google) Picasa has been available for windows since 2004. Version 2 since 2005, Version 3 since September 2008. Meanwhile Chrome version 1 beta was released in Sepetember 2008.

 

[needthephone]

I don't understand why you would want picasa on an imac which ahs iphoto??

picasa puts in anb index file so google can see what you have indexed too.

Like someone said I can tolerate google on my PC but it is always updating, you fell always looking at you, it's like installing hal (the evil computer from 2001) its always searching always spying..

 

[HyperZboy]

It's not "emulated code" Wine is not an emulator (that is even what the acronym "WINE" stands for) It is a compatibility layer, read the wine wikipedia article for more info. You're not running windows in the background like you would with virtualization programs or emulators. Also it's clearly not "FAR WORSE" than cider since it's the exact same technology.

Who cares whether its a compatibility layer or emulated code?

BOTH have disadvantages and Mac users do not like either unless there is no other choice.

Macs are now Windows-compatible, so why should Mac users settle for these substandard done on the cheap alternatives?

With the Mac market growing at the expense of Windows market share, you'd think Google of all smart companies would know better.

Mac users may love having Windows compatibility as a Plan B, but they're NEVER IN A MILLION YEARS going to embrace these Windows based hacks wholeheartedly as a Plan A unless they are forced to.

And of course at LEAST 25-40% of the Mac market can't even use this program since they still have a PowerPC Mac of some kind.

 

[lamadude]

Who cares whether its a compatibility layer or emulated code?

BOTH have disadvantages and Mac users do not like either unless there is no other choice.

Macs are now Windows-compatible, so why should Mac users settle for these substandard done on the cheap alternatives?

With the Mac market growing at the expense of Windows market share, you'd think Google of all smart companies would know better.

Mac users may love having Windows compatibility as a Plan B, but they're NEVER IN A MILLION YEARS going to embrace these Windows based hacks wholeheartedly as a Plan A unless they are forced to.

And of course at LEAST 25-40% of the Mac market can't even use this program since they still have a PowerPC Mac of some kind.

Look, I would have preferred it if they had develloped picasa for mac from scratch as well, but it's still a great program. And the fact that a program that has been ported "on the cheap" is still way faster than iPhoto should give apple some food for thought.

 

[knightlie]

iPhoto locks up your photo library in a format no other non-apple program can get to. If you use images from say your camera in other places, you have to "export" them first for any other program to see them... how silly.

This is not true. All my iPhoto-managed pictures are right in the Pictures folder where I put them.

Picasa seems nice and fast but it doesn't look or feel like a Mac app... I think I'll stick with iPhoto for the time being.

The UI is awful. Plus it crashes each time I try to import a folder, so it's now in the trash. iPhoto might be a bit awkward, but at least it's a real Mac app and it works properly.

 

[Trip.Tucker]

<snip>

I guess there's my answer....emulated code. That's FAR WORSE than even Cider's method. You might as well just run Parallels or Fusion on your Intel Mac and run the full featured Windows version.


As for 'free', clearly what the guy meant is Apple isn't giving ANYTHING away for free. They simply figure the cost/value of the product and add it into the price of the machine they're selling. Simply put, if they didn't include it, the machine would cost less. So again, you aren't getting ANYTHING for free from Apple. <snip>.

1. WINE = Wine Is Not an Emulator. Did you not read my post? It's not worse than Cider's method, they are the same approach. Running Parallels or Fusion is a different game again. You need to Google on emulation and read the FAQ at http://www.winehq.org

2. Free is free. No conspiracies, no wink-wink, no secret costs. Free. They don't factor in the cost of the software into the machine. So, you are, in fact, getting something free from Apple.

Maybe you're in the wrong forums? Windows is thattaway....--->

 

[fxstb2002]

I prefer the management style of iPhoto, once I understood it. I didn't like it at first. However, it works like I work. I am a recent switcher, and used Picasa on Windows previously.

I do prefer the RAW support in Picasa though, and would definately upgrade if iPhoto added this. Aperture is just not what I need though.

 

[chameleon81]

Why?

I used to love Picasa a lot when I was using Windows because it was fast very user friendly and offered free web-upload function.

After I switched Mac I started to use iPhoto.

I can do everything ( nearly everything ,exept collage ) with iPhoto and I'm able to use picasawebalbums.

So my question is why are you so excited with Picasa for Mac? Am I missing sth?

Cheers

 

[ipoddin]

How many GB do you have?

Have left? 10gb on my hard drive. Where does Picassa store the iPhoto images it's copying over on import? I do have a large iPhoto database but no way to stop the import now that it's started. Every time I restart Picassa it continues the import and crashes.

 

[GenNovE]

1. WINE = Wine Is Not an Emulator. Did you not read my post? It's not worse than Cider's method, they are the same approach. Running Parallels or Fusion is a different game again. You need to Google on emulation and read the FAQ at http://www.winehq.org

2. Free is free. No conspiracies, no wink-wink, no secret costs. Free. They don't factor in the cost of the software into the machine. So, you are, in fact, getting something free from Apple.

Maybe you're in the wrong forums? Windows is thattaway....--->

I disagree with you.
Apple is not giving you nothing for free. Have you ever thought why Macs are more expensive then windows? If you think that apple does not wage in software and hardware cost then you are sadly mistaken.

I use to work for a software company that would sell you their software & 1 year of service for 1 year. Included in the 129.99 was a discounted cost on the software full application & the yearly serivce. But they never advertised their pricing completely they simply sold it as Buy oUR software get 1 year free.

There are a lot of internal business only practices that the end user never knows about. Yeah apple is saying ITS FREE with every purchase BUT TRUST ME THEY ARE CHARGING YOU-Not full price of course but @ a discount.

Plus you have to remember who your dealing with here. Apples head poncho jerked his own friend woz of an atari deal. He told his friend they got paid a certain amount and pocketed the rest.
It woulndt surprise me if such business practice is not applicable in this case. COMPANIES DO IT ALL THE TIME MOST OF US JUST DONT KNOW ABOUT IT.

Business 101 is that way...---------------------->>>>

 

[Cheffy Dave]

meanwhile i love how picasa manages the photo library over iphoto (which is horrid imo)

i hate iphoto like i hate the gators lol

GO GATORS

 

[Razeus]

2. Free is free. No conspiracies, no wink-wink, no secret costs. Free. They don't factor in the cost of the software into the machine. So, you are, in fact, getting something free from Apple.

Maybe you're in the wrong forums? Windows is thattaway....--->

I'm going to dismiss your statements on this subject. I see you clearly have no knack for business. Me, on the other hand, an accountant by profession and currently an MBA student, will tell you that the price is factor into the price of the Mac.

Wait until I until you this (make sure you're sitting first)....you're OS isn't free either. That cost has too been factor into your Mac's price. Along with your Core 2 Duo, Nvidia chip...

 

[cogsinister]

Oh, wow, it's running using Wine? I had no idea.

I run on wine as well...........

 

[lowbatteries]

iPhoto '09

The new iPhoto announcements made me delete the not-yet-installed version of Picasa I had downloaded this morning. Facial recognition was my a big selling point, but the GPS features are what I've been waiting for! I've been meticulously adding geotags to my photo from my GPS logger for quite a while.

Sorry Google, Apple was just half a day behind you ...

 

[tilman]

It is a normal mac application in the sense that you can just drag it to your apps folder and it works. However this does not mean it's not using wine technology.
I can't be 100% sure that it uses wine, but I am 99% sure, it hasn't changed any interface elements and but it looks exactly the same as picasa for linux which is definitely wine based. Also, google has put a lot of resources into improving wine with the exact purpose of making it support picasa 3.

Picasa for Mac is a native OSX application, and does not use Wine. Picasa for Linux is using Wine.

 

[chillywilly]

I will have to give this a try. I've used Piscasa on my Windows PC. We'll see how it works on the Mac.

 

[knightlie]

Picasa for Mac is a native OSX application, and does not use Wine. Picasa for Linux is using Wine.

It's UI controls are certainly not native.

 

[yotoad]

hypothetical

could i use iPhoto on my user account and my wife (another user on the same iMac) use Picasa for the same photos? she really enjoyed using picasa on our PC but hasn't touch iPhoto since we switched.

 

[doug in albq]

After checking out Picasa for a couple of hours I deleted it.

This is an app. geared for the consumer, not the pro, or even the prosumer. If you shoot in .jpg from your point and shoot camera you might be happy with this product.

There is no color management!

.jpg's looked OK in Picasa, any of my .RAW pictures darkened up in Picasa. I could even see it happening one picture at a time. After Picasa initially loaded my pictures I could see it, going from the top to the bottom, darkening up all my .nef and .dmg pictures. I am not sure why this happens and there is little support/information from Google about the app.

To be fair, I do not use iPhoto, so I cannot compare the two. I never like iPhoto either.

Photoshop/Bridge working fine for me

 

[Trip.Tucker]

I'm going to dismiss your statements on this subject. I see you clearly have no knack for business. Me, on the other hand, an accountant by profession and currently an MBA student, will tell you that the price is factor into the price of the Mac.

Wait until I until you this (make sure you're sitting first)....you're OS isn't free either. That cost has too been factor into your Mac's price. Along with your Core 2 Duo, Nvidia chip...

You've been told by several posters here and you have chosen to ignore the comments being made, so clearly you don't want to pay heed. What you say you do for a living is irrelevant and lends no weight to your statements. You cannot possibly know what I do in business so your statements on that count are also irrelevant.

You're new here and while your attitude has been brash and somewhat arrogant but I'm sure you'll get the hang of the forums soon. Just remember you're speaking to a wide audience from many walks of life and not a bunch of kiddies with a single topic focus.