Mac OS X is just another Unix implementation, and by all accounts it's a pretty serious one at that. What was stopping anyone from just downloading the Linux version, and compiling it on a Mac?

I prefer digiKam anyway.

Reg Official: Mac User = fanboy!

(darn! we were all hoping it'd be mactards)

Mactards would snub it anyway for iPhoto. The plug in they already have would probally do better.

I'm not a Mac or Linux user (at the moment), but I'm starting to find the constant use of 'fanboy', 'freetard' and similar childish labels slightly irritating. Any chance of growing up a little this year?

In case you didn't know, Picasa is a) closed-source and b) running on a particular version of Wine. As such, while it's possible to run X11 on OSX, I don't think porting would be trivial - this "fanboy edition" sounds like a native application. Which would be welcome on Linux as well I guess; although for my needs digiKam has also been fine. Some seem to like F-Spot too.

Like Geotag and stuff, aren't even in the Linux version either...

But still it's a good way to organise your photo's, but i'm sure the ever defiant mac fan will still favour Iphoto over Picasa

news to me. well, yes, you can make basic adjustments, but iPhoto's strength is mainly as an organiser.

Not possible, mac osx doesn't use xorg or any of the O/S windowing systems, it'd have to be programmed specifically to osx browser and windowing APIs. (Unless they used a middleware library like GTK ofc but commercial companies are not often willing too.)

The Linux version is binary only, so you cannot "compile it on a Mac." It's mostly identical to the Windows version but with a specially modified version of Wine bundled with it. Presumably the Mac version will be implemented similarly - Google Earth works the same way in Linux.

Mainly because the 'Linux version' was already the Windows version in a Wine coating?

I for one welcome a Mac version - but I'll have a look at it first this evening to see if it's native or another re-hash...

iPhoto is handy though, it is very well-integrated with other Mac OS programs, and as I keep some photos on Google webalbums, the Picasa uploader does the trick really well.

Oh, another thing... you INQs are really annoying lately with the over-use of 'fanboys' and words like Mactards. Grow up already. YES, I have a mac, so what? During the day, I develop software for a company using Visual Studio .NET, at home I love my mac and my 2 laptops, both with Linux. So how would you call me?

The only reason I'd need the Picasa client is to resize/reformat photos for backing up on the Picasa web service... and there's a Google plugin for iPhoto which does that.

Ho hum.

And in response to A J Stiles; probably, nothing. But 99% of Mac users, like me, have jobs to do and just want stuff to work, not to have to mess around with code and compiling and stuff.

This was the one piece of software I missed when I switched! Now I can finally ditch crummy iPhoto!

Never owned a Mac and no plans to go near one in the future, but still this hilarious new "fanboy" thing just doesn't fly. It feels a bit like El Reg having been taken over by its own stupider, younger brother, who wants to say the funny words but doesn't really know what they mean.. or what made them funny in the first place. I can almost see the open mouthed, expectant face of the author now, gormlessly waiting for the laughter that never comes, repeating the same failed joke over and over, before getting confused, and cross, and stamping their chubby little foot down on some lego.

Oh christ, I don't know, maybe we're all getting stupider.

After one and a half years as a Mac user my impression overall is: great hardware, nice OS, shame about the bundled apps.

iPhoto is a dog and i won't miss it.

I prefer iPhoto myself, but I've used Picasa on Windows a bit and it works well enough. For many users, having both folders and albums is confusing, at least for people I've tried to demonstrate it to...

last time i checked the spelling was "fanboi"... innit

i for one welcome our childish-word-using overlords.

I agree, the use of fanboi is erraneous. But fanatic, militant, church-of-jobs brainwashed moron is too long to fit in most sentences. (And if you hadn't been one of them, and had ever had any conversation with a McMoron, you'd know that this is true.)

//Svein

Poo head

I won't be using it, because I'm a smug git, and have something better. I bought a license for Bibble Pro for about 50 quid, because I needed something that understood Leica raw format, and wasn't restricted to 24 bit colour internally (like wot GIMP is if you use the raw importers people have written for it). All of this ruled Picassa out, of course.

Bibble is a revelation, and has some absolutely killer features specifically tailored for "digital darkroom" tasks, batch processing and other stuff. I prefer it to using Leica's own imort filter for photoshop, unless I actually need to do something dastardly to the pictures in question. Great software- huge time-saver and fantastic results too. The chromatic aberation and lens distortion compensation (which compensates with great specificity) on their own are worth having, even before you consider the insanely good raw support, the reassuring non-destructive workflow and and all the other fantastic stuff.

Of course, the biggest benefit was that buying the pro version grants you a license that lets you run your software on mac, windows or linux (as well as nifty multicore support), so I have it installed on all three, and can crunch the output of my camera at home or work, whichever computer I'm on. Brilliant software- and multi-platform licensing always makes me feel less screwed. I really feel like I got my money's worth for this great software- oh, and the support is good too. Oh yeah, and the much-threatened v5 is on the way this year, and is looking quite spangly too.

So, if you find the free alternatives aren't quite cutting it, give Bibble a go, and maybe you can be as horrifyingly smug as me. Oh yeah, and you'll be getting great pictures from your camera in a short time, too- side-benefit :)

Paris, because she approves of touching up.

(People who are happy with Picassa, good on you)

If the linux version is just the Windows version shoddily forced into running from wine, surely Mac users could just download Darwine and run the Window$ version for a more complete experience? Or is there some proprietary undocumented calls that the Windows-native version of Picasa uses that causes Wine to ape out? (Believe me, I was testing a few kiddie games with Wine on my Debian desktop the other day. A handful of them crashed for no good reason).