Posted by: Nathan Willis
on December 14, 2006 09:59 PM
There's no end to the list of "image browsers" -- meaning apps that let you scroll through folders looking at thumbnails. But that's a different use case than full-fledged "photo managers."
Now, having said that, the big question is where you draw that line. Frankly there are just dozens and dozens of apps that kind of do photo management. It depends entirely on the user whether an app is a "too simple" thumbnail browser or a "good enough" photo manager. I chose to leave out gThumb (and GTKsee) because (a) feature-wise they are far on the low-end of the simple browser-to-photo manager spectrum, (b) they refer to themselves as "viewers" or "browsers" and (c) there's only so much space in an article before people stop reading, so I wanted to get around to the apps that are actually good photo managers.
KimDaBa / Kphotoalbum also didn't make the cut; in my own tests it is buggy and its interface is a disaster. Breaks all conventions of normal photo management in an effort to be "different," plus it doesn't offer basic features the other apps do. That gave it walking papers for this article.
Granted, I was very, very unimpressed with Digikam and F-Spot (very), but they were necessary evils, since they are touted as the "official" photo management apps for their respective DE's.
In any event, I could certainly have added more apps to the "don't" pile covered in this story, but none of them would have changed what I put in the "do" pile. For people who just want a recommendation, it doesn't matter what the discarded alternatives were.
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
Re:did you forget something?
Posted by: Nathan Willis on December 14, 2006 09:59 PMNow, having said that, the big question is where you draw that line. Frankly there are just dozens and dozens of apps that kind of do photo management. It depends entirely on the user whether an app is a "too simple" thumbnail browser or a "good enough" photo manager. I chose to leave out gThumb (and GTKsee) because (a) feature-wise they are far on the low-end of the simple browser-to-photo manager spectrum, (b) they refer to themselves as "viewers" or "browsers" and (c) there's only so much space in an article before people stop reading, so I wanted to get around to the apps that are actually good photo managers.
KimDaBa / Kphotoalbum also didn't make the cut; in my own tests it is buggy and its interface is a disaster. Breaks all conventions of normal photo management in an effort to be "different," plus it doesn't offer basic features the other apps do. That gave it walking papers for this article.
Granted, I was very, very unimpressed with Digikam and F-Spot (very), but they were necessary evils, since they are touted as the "official" photo management apps for their respective DE's.
In any event, I could certainly have added more apps to the "don't" pile covered in this story, but none of them would have changed what I put in the "do" pile. For people who just want a recommendation, it doesn't matter what the discarded alternatives were.
#