Mailinglist Archive: opensuse (5130 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [SLE] Picassa for Linux
  • From: kai <kai@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 21:39:14 -0700
  • Message-id: <200605272139.14962.kai@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Saturday 27 May 2006 09:35 am, Daniel Bauer wrote:
> Am Samstag, 27. Mai 2006 18:06 schrieb kai:

Ja! Dass schrieb ich! :P

<snip>

> > However, on the Google list, I saw a few of the employees mention that
> > they are working on a true Linux port of Google Earth, since it is
> > apparently already written in Qt - the very cool library which also runs
> > the very kool KDE.
> >
> > Stand by...same bat time....same bat channel...
> After the long discussion about registering on Suse 10.1 in this ML I just
> wonder if privacy is something people expect only from Suse...???

Must've missed that thread. I have yet to register any of my 10.1 systems. Ah
well, anyone with any talent will know my IP. I rarely use a proxy - only
when hitting "those" sites.

>
> With installing picasa you'll have to accept a long, long text (who reads
> it?). You don't have to klick for any registration - this is done fully
> automatically, if you want or not. it's quite worth having a look at
> http://picasa.google.com/linux/eula.html:
>
> "The Picasa Software may communicate with Google's servers to check for
> available updates to the Picasa Software..."
>
> "Each time you launch Picasa, PicasaUpdate.exe checks the Picasa server for
> the latest available version."
>
> "By installing the Picasa Software and not disabling the automated check
> for Updates, you hereby agree to automatically request and receive Updates
> from Google's servers."
>
> "If you send a request to Googles servers, we record standard log
> information, including Internet Protocol addresses and information related
> to your request. We also log information about the installation process
> and your system and settings when you download Picasa."
>
> Don't tell me you can switch off the "calling home" - you can, but only
> *after* your install that has already sent (at least) the data mentioned
> above...

Oh, no!! Google might know my IP???? I hope that doesn't happen whever I click
on an AdSense link or on their search engine.

</ sarcasm mode>


>
> Forthermore to my eyes picasa is very "unlinux":
> (see http://picasa.google.com/linux/eula.html)
>
> "You agree not to modify, adapt, translate, prepare derivative works from,
> decompile, reverse engineer, disassemble or otherwise attempt to derive
> source code from the Picasa Software"

What does that have to do with Linux, Mr. Stallman. :P

Seriously, though, companies should make OSS - that is a notion I agree with.
I believe most good work these days is OSS. However, there's no law saying
one can only run OSS on their systems. Unfortunately, there are still many
who believe that closed source is the only way to go. I was asked by a
programmer at my work the other day how one would expect to make money if one
wrote OSS instead of closed source. This question simply shows the level of
ignorance and brain-washing inherent in today's programmer.

I simply pull out the examples of MySQL and RedHat when describing how money
can be made using an OSS model. Eventually enough people will begin to
understand.

>
> or http://picasa.google.com/linux/faq.html#26:
>
> "Picasa for Linux isn’t open source; it uses a carefully tested version of
> Wine to run the current Windows version of Picasa. Wine itself is an
> open-source implementation of the Windows API. It runs on top of the X
> Window System and Linux or Unix."
>
> Well, who accepts this can as well stay with M$ at all, IMHO. Google *uses*
> open source wine, but hides their own part. A game played very well and
> professionally by M$ since ages. It is definitively not what I understand
> the "linux way"...

I'm not quite sure what the "linux way" is other than what Richard Stallman
may advocate. Of course, he disagrees with even the term "Linux" as it is.

In any case, I see no reason Google couldn't take the code they bought and
write a WINE wrapper around it to make it available to us in the *nix
community. There may be further legal implications we are not aware of. For
example, most Win32 code is written with toolkits which themselves are not
OSS in nature. Hence, if Picasa were written with one of these controls,
Google would be automatically not able to give out the entire source code,
simply because they wouldn't have the source code for the toolkit.

I've installed it on my 10.0 laptop and my mom's 9.2 system and it works
great. I don't see Google as "evil" or "monopolistic" in the same way
Microsoft is or Novell once was. (I used to bash Novell in the mid-90's as
much as I did/do Microsoft.) The fact that Microshaft takes others' code and
wraps it into their own (i.e. Visio, DOS, Windows NT/2K/XP...) is a business
decision, which has worked very well for Microsoft. Google is simply
following the path of least resistance by buying companies such as Picasa or
Keyhole

Here's an old snapshot of Picasa's website:

http://web.archive.org/web/20030215114048/www.lifescapeinc.com/picasa/


>
> IMHO: if there are enough downloads they will *never* consider a native
> linux port, because they see that linux people don't give a sh** on privacy
> and open source as long as an application is kind of cool.

That may be, but I have a strong suspicion there are other reasons. Just look
at what they're doing with Google Earth, which will be a true Linux port,
once they're done.


>
> There are really *great* applications developped in the open source world
> and I think one should better support them than the "big industry", don't
> you think so, too?

Well, valid point. If I knew C# better, I might try my hand at making F-Spot a
workable product.

If I knew C++ at all, I'd begin to fix the horrendous UI in the GIMP so people
would actually use it.

Unfortunately, I know neither language.

I will continue to support OSS projects like JAlbum (http://jalbum.net/),
which I use still to make my HTML photo pages.

http://www.perfectreign.com/pics/2005/june/index.html

Oh, wait - JAlbum can't be OSS because it relies on Java. The horrible non OSS
language created by the eVul James Gosling. I'll have to go back to the OSS
software F-Spot created using mono.net based on the C# language advanced by
that bastion of open source support, Microsoft.

http://tinyurl.com/m5eyc

(I actually was at TechEd 01 and was very interested in .net, but then became
very disillusioned.)

--
kai - www.perfectreign.com
www.livebeans.com - the new NetBeans community

43...for those who require slightly more than
the answer to life, the universe and everything.

< Previous Next >