Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Which do you like better: iPhoto or Picasa?

  • iPhoto

    Votes: 19 54.3%
  • Picasa

    Votes: 12 34.3%
  • Never used Picasa/iPhoto

    Votes: 4 11.4%

  • Total voters
    35

Frisco

macrumors 68020
Original poster
Sep 24, 2002
2,475
69
Utopia
Picasa Web Albums Uploader is available for Mac.

I just recently used Picasa for the first time. I was very impressed and surprised at how good it is. I wish it was available for Mac, but with this release of the Uploader it doesn't look like Google will be making it. I guess they think iPhoto is good enough.

Which do you like better: iPhoto or Picasa?
 
I like iPhoto because it fits so seamlessly with all of my iLife apps and they all just function together. Plus, Apple makes it so I am morally bound to use it. :)
 
It goes without saying iPhoto is far better when it comes to integration with other Apple apps.
 
The new version of Picasa (v 3) is superior to iPhoto. The only thing is that these programs do not compete because iPhoto is limited to the Mac and Picasa to Windows and Linux.

Check out v3 of Picasa if you have not already! Wow!
 
The new version of Picasa (v 3) is superior to iPhoto. The only thing is that these programs do not compete because iPhoto is limited to the Mac and Picasa to Windows and Linux.

Check out v3 of Picasa if you have not already! Wow!

I would agree. Picasa is fantastic and keeps getting more so with every update. I have been a Picasa user since the early days under winXp. I am still running it under VirtualBox on my new MBP. I like iPhoto but I do not like the way photos are stored on disk.
 
I would agree. Picasa is fantastic and keeps getting more so with every update. I have been a Picasa user since the early days under winXp. I am still running it under VirtualBox on my new MBP. I like iPhoto but I do not like the way photos are stored on disk.

Really, I kind of like the way iPhoto (and other mac apps) store their content kind of like a database file. I like it because to manipulate a photo in another program such as seashore you have to make a duplicate from iPhoto then manipulate the duplicate. Because of this, I find that I am less likely to somehow mess up the original photo.
 
Really, I kind of like the way iPhoto (and other mac apps) store their content kind of like a database file. I like it because to manipulate a photo in another program such as seashore you have to make a duplicate from iPhoto then manipulate the duplicate. Because of this, I find that I am less likely to somehow mess up the original photo.

If all of my machines were Macs I would probably like it too. But I have several machines still running XP and one running Ubuntu. I also am running SageTV which works best when I have the photos organized by year. I like to have my photos all under one directory like this.

photos/year/event/photo_001.jpg

Maybe there is a way to organize them like this under iPhoto and I just haven't found it? There are a couple of things I love about iPhoto - particularly the multitouch capability for flipping thru and reorienting the pictures.
 
iPhoto is pretty good. I'd have to say I prefer Aperture though (granted it is expensive if you let that stop you :D)
The lack of any zoom function within a normal viewer of iPhoto window is quite annoying. I normally find myself wanting to zoom in on the 10 glorious megapixels of photo detail, but I am instead forced to "edit" the photo, which is annoying when it takes a second to load and further shrinks the photo on the little 13" screen of my MB... The simple addition of the Loupe in Aperture makes things positively wonderful when I am, say, examining just what sort of critter I happened to photograph from the next peak over :D (mind you that is without any crazy zoom lens. I love camera technology, lol)

Really, I kind of like the way iPhoto (and other mac apps) store their content kind of like a database file. I like it because to manipulate a photo in another program such as seashore you have to make a duplicate from iPhoto then manipulate the duplicate. Because of this, I find that I am less likely to somehow mess up the original photo.

This is the one thing I HATE about iPhoto/Aperture. Try uploading a file to a website using their basic browser-based uploader. Try to find that file by navigating to it like you think you would be able to. Nope. There's a database file there. And you can't "View Package Contents" from within the browser.
So, you are forced to make a copy just to conveniently upload, or to find the exact Filename for each and every photo you are uploading and manually search for it from the search bar in the browser window. You would think that something like Safari that is so "integrated" would be able to navigate through iPhoto/Aperture's database, but I guess not.

Back on subject, I have not yet used the new version of Picasa, but the old versions were nice, but iPhoto/Aperture still wins in my mind.
 
If all of my machines were Macs I would probably like it too. But I have several machines still running XP and one running Ubuntu. I also am running SageTV which works best when I have the photos organized by year. I like to have my photos all under one directory like this.

photos/year/event/photo_001.jpg

Maybe there is a way to organize them like this under iPhoto and I just haven't found it? There are a couple of things I love about iPhoto - particularly the multitouch capability for flipping thru and reorienting the pictures.

Makes sure you put them into events that are organized within iPhoto, and makes sure you have your preferences set so that iPhoto keeps your library nice and neat. They should then appear as:
iPhoto Library/year/event_name/photo_001.jpg
 
I just can't agree with Picasa, it's good don't get me wrong, but I much prefer the whole events thing in iPhoto.
 
I much prefer Picasa too and hate the way iPhoto/Aperture store files. Is Picasa not coming to osx soon?
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.