Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Consumer Reports rated digital photo editors including freeware

Reply
Thread Tools

Consumer Reports rated digital photo editors including freeware

 
 
Rod Speed
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-02-2007
catherine yronwode <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote
> catherine yronwode <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote


>> I had never heard of the "freeware" Corel Snapfire version
>> 1.10 and now I know why. I'd recommend avoiding it.


> Wow. I'm beginning to smell a rat. All of us know what
> "good" software feels and smells like the moment we go
> to the web page and begin to download and install it.


Wrong, some stuff with a very different UI can grow on you over time.

And some stuff with a rather klunky UI does some things
so much better than the other free alternatives do that
you put up with the rather klunky UI to get it for free too.

> This Corel snapfire software sure feels and smells like crapware. I'm
> beginning to suspect Consumer Reports got paid (somehow) to include
> it in their ratings, and they just threw in Picaso and Irfanview so
> it wouldn't look like the bold-faced advertising that it really was.


Utterly mindless conspiracy theory.

> Consider this blurb from the Corel web site ...


> http://www.corel.com/servlet/Satelli.../1157074934642
> Corel Snapfire and Corel Snapfire Plus


> Corel Snapfire and Corel Snapfire Plus, the first two releases from
> Corel's next-generation modular digital imaging platform code-named
> "Alta," are the smart alternatives to traditional digital camera
> software. As a free download, Corel Snapfire provides all the tools
> user need to easily organize, enhance and share their digital photos
> and video clips. Easier to learn and use than comparable products,
> Corel Snapfire is the first free photo software to make a wide range
> of popular photo and video sharing and organizing capabilities
> readily accessible to users of all levels. Users can access Corel
> Snapfire at www.snapfire.com. Users can easily upgrade to Snapfire
> Plus, the enhanced version of the free download, as their experience
> and confidence with digital photo and video editing grows. It offers
> several more advanced yet easy-to-use photo- and video-editing
> features, including the popular Makeover Tools and Picture Tubes,
> currently found only in Corel Paint Shop Pro. In addition, Snapfire
> Plus provides more options for creating unique slide shows, including
> easy video editing and full control over motion effects and transitions,
> additional project templates and the PhotoSafe Backup System.


There's plenty of stuff that provides quite decent free version and
you pay for the enhanced version. Most obviously with AVG etc.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Unclaimed Mysteries
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-02-2007
catherine yronwode wrote in part:

> By the way, speaking of Gimp, how come Consumer Reports didn't even test
> Gimp as a freeware photo editor. I'll bet it beats photoshop in
> functionality and price!


The Gimp is not freeware, by a strict definition of that term.

--
It Came From Corry Lee Smith's Unclaimed Mysteries.
http://www.unclaimedmysteries.net
Keep your head and arms inside The Mixer at all times.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Logan Shaw
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-02-2007
Unclaimed Mysteries wrote:
> catherine yronwode wrote in part:


>> By the way, speaking of Gimp, how come Consumer Reports didn't even test
>> Gimp as a freeware photo editor. I'll bet it beats photoshop in
>> functionality and price!


> The Gimp is not freeware, by a strict definition of that term.


I'm not sure that there is any one authoritative definition of the
term "freeware". The definition I would use would include all GPL-ed
software, since GPL-ed software is free to use. So, that would
include the Gimp.

I'm not looking to start a debate. I'm just wondering what good it
does to reference "a strict definition" when you haven't given any
details about what that definition is and there is not broad agreement
on a single definition for the term. (See, for example, the
definitions on m-w.com and wikipedia.org, neither of which really
fits with your strict definition.)

- Logan
 
Reply With Quote
 
Unclaimed Mysteries
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-02-2007
Logan Shaw wrote:
> Unclaimed Mysteries wrote:
>> catherine yronwode wrote in part:

>
>>> By the way, speaking of Gimp, how come Consumer Reports didn't even test
>>> Gimp as a freeware photo editor. I'll bet it beats photoshop in
>>> functionality and price!

>
>> The Gimp is not freeware, by a strict definition of that term.

>
> I'm not sure that there is any one authoritative definition of the
> term "freeware". The definition I would use would include all GPL-ed
> software, since GPL-ed software is free to use. So, that would
> include the Gimp.
>
> I'm not looking to start a debate. I'm just wondering what good it
> does to reference "a strict definition" when you haven't given any
> details about what that definition is and there is not broad agreement
> on a single definition for the term. (See, for example, the
> definitions on m-w.com and wikipedia.org, neither of which really
> fits with your strict definition.)
>
> - Logan


I'm sorry, I fell asleep. Could you repeat the question?

--
It Came From Corry Lee Smith's Unclaimed Mysteries.
http://www.unclaimedmysteries.net
Keep your head and arms inside The Mixer at all times.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Susan Bugher
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-02-2007
Unclaimed Mysteries wrote:
> Logan Shaw wrote:


>>> The Gimp is not freeware, by a strict definition of that term.


>> I'm not looking to start a debate. I'm just wondering what good it
>> does to reference "a strict definition" when you haven't given any
>> details about what that definition is and there is not broad agreement
>> on a single definition for the term. (See, for example, the
>> definitions on m-w.com and wikipedia.org, neither of which really
>> fits with your strict definition.)


> I'm sorry, I fell asleep. Could you repeat the question?


Please define your "strict definition" of Freeware. Please explain why
The Gimp does not meet that definition.

on second thought. . . nevermind.

The Gimp *IS* Freeware by alt.comp.freeware's definition. (The Gimp is
also FOSS (free open source software)).

http://www.pricelesswarehome.org/acf...y.php#Freeware
"Freeware: Legally obtainable software that you may use at no cost,
monetary or otherwise, for as long as you wish."

Susan
--
Posted to alt.comp.freeware
Search alt.comp.freeware (or read it online):
http://www.google.com/advanced_group....comp.freeware
Pricelessware & ACF: http://www.pricelesswarehome.org
Pricelessware: http://www.pricelessware.org (not maintained)
 
Reply With Quote
 
Unclaimed Mysteries
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-02-2007
Susan Bugher wrote:
> Unclaimed Mysteries wrote:
>> Logan Shaw wrote:

>
>>>> The Gimp is not freeware, by a strict definition of that term.

>
>>> I'm not looking to start a debate. I'm just wondering what good it
>>> does to reference "a strict definition" when you haven't given any
>>> details about what that definition is and there is not broad agreement
>>> on a single definition for the term. (See, for example, the
>>> definitions on m-w.com and wikipedia.org, neither of which really
>>> fits with your strict definition.)

>
>> I'm sorry, I fell asleep. Could you repeat the question?

>
> Please define your "strict definition" of Freeware. Please explain why
> The Gimp does not meet that definition.
>
> on second thought. . . nevermind.


Good choice. Try this instead. They are diplomatic and authoritative:
http://www.bellevuelinux.org/freeware.html

This is NOT diplomatic:
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-....html#Freeware

For most users it won't really matter as long as your freeware program
makes you happy and is not fouling up the computer. It's when things go
wrong that people get bent out of shape over their f-d up freeware.

Clearly, people developing and supporting free software and open source
software have an interest in reducing that confusion. Other people,
opposed to free software and open source software, have an interest in
keeping the confusion up. You can take a few wild guesses at who that
could possibly be.

The many developers (http://gimp.org/team.html) of The Gimp
(http://gimp.org/) work very hard on their project. They release the
source code for all to examine and critique.

BTW, http://gimpguru.org/ has some good tutorials.

With freeware, all_you_get_is_the_executable. Like I said, sometimes
that's enough.

> The Gimp *IS* Freeware by alt.comp.freeware's definition. (The Gimp is
> also FOSS (free open source software)).
>


But they are not synonyms. That's all I'm sayin'.

--
It Came From Corry Lee Smith's Unclaimed Mysteries.
http://www.unclaimedmysteries.net
 
Reply With Quote
 
John Corliss
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-02-2007
Everybody should note that this thread is cross-posted into a couple of
other (relevant) newsgroups.

catherine yronwode wrote:
> M.L. wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I just noticed Consumer Reports evaluated & rated, for the first
>>>> time I've ever seen, freeware digital photo-editing sofware such as
>>>> - Picasa 2.2.0 http://picasa.google.com
>>>> - IrfanView 3.99 http://www.infranview.com
>>>> - Corel Snapfire 1.10 http://www.corel.com

>>
>> CU did a report on IrfanView and other editors a few years ago. They
>> were not impressed with Irfanview.

>
> What I like about Irfanview is not the "editing" capability but the sheer
> speed in viewing pictures. Is any freeware photo "viewer" as fast as
> Irfanview? I think not.


Pretty sure that xNView is:

http://www.xnview.com/

If it's not, then it's mighty close.

> So, it's no wonder Consumer Reports didn't rate it well then nor now as
> it's not really a freeware photo editor such as Gimp.
>
> By the way, speaking of Gimp, how come Consumer Reports didn't even test
> Gimp as a freeware photo editor. I'll bet it beats photoshop in
> functionality and price!


Check out Computer Shopper's evaluation of it compared to Photoshop:

http://tinyurl.com/yumk3u

--
John Corliss BS206. I don't reply to trolls like Andy Mabbett, Bear
Bottoms, Hummingbird or proteanthread.
Due to all the spam coming from that service, I use NFilter to
filter out all posts from Google Groups.
No ad, cd, commercial, cripple, demo, NAGWARE, share, spy, time-limited,
trial or web wares or warez for me, please.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Ron Hunter
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-02-2007
Bear Bottoms wrote:
> On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 14:57:52 -0500, Mark Warner
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> Bear Bottoms wrote:
>>>
>>> Nothing wrong with a free subscription from consumer reports.

>>
>> It's not free.
>>

> OOPS...something wrong with that!
>
>

Well, it is rather strange to expect someone to pay for a review of free
software, not isn't it?
I have most of the free stuff listed, and always seem to come back to
Irfanview for its simple interface, instant loading, and extensive
feature list. There are others that do one thing or the other better,
but Irfanview is still ahead in my book, all things considered.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Ron Hunter
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-02-2007
ASAAR wrote:
> On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 21:32:33 GMT, catherine yronwode wrote:
>
>> Oh my. I didn't mean for the point to be the Consumer Reports link ... the
>> point was that Consumer Reports RATED PHOTO EDITOR FREEWARE such as
>> Irfanview, Picasa, and Snapfire.
>>
>> I thought it was interesting as I had never seen a review on CR for
>> freeware before.

>
> It was. Your single OP was of far more interesting than almost all
> of the many dozens of OPs from another of this newsgroup's Rich
> denizens. I wonder how many times ad-based magazines include or
> seriously consider photo editor freeware in their software reviews.
>

PC Magazine does this often.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Susan Bugher
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-02-2007
Unclaimed Mysteries wrote:
> Susan Bugher wrote:
>> Unclaimed Mysteries wrote:


>>>>> The Gimp is not freeware, by a strict definition of that term.


>> Please define your "strict definition" of Freeware. Please explain why
>> The Gimp does not meet that definition.
>>
>> on second thought. . . nevermind.


> Good choice. Try this instead. They are diplomatic and authoritative:
> http://www.bellevuelinux.org/freeware.html
>
> This is NOT diplomatic:
> http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-....html#Freeware


"Freeware is computer software that is made available free of charge,
but which is copyrighted by its developer, who retains the rights to
control its distribution, modify it and sell it in the future. It is
typically distributed without its source code, thus preventing
modification by its users."

That's not a "strict definition". It's a STUPID definition. It includes
such things as Adware and Spyware while excluding FOSS apps.

> With freeware, all_you_get_is_the_executable.


True only if you use a STUPID definition of Freeware.

Like I said, sometimes
> that's enough.


>> The Gimp *IS* Freeware by alt.comp.freeware's definition. (The Gimp is
>> also FOSS (free open source software)).


http://www.pricelesswarehome.org/acf...y.php#Freeware
"Freeware: Legally obtainable software that you may use at no cost,
monetary or otherwise, for as long as you wish."

Please note that alt.comp.freeware's definition excludes apps with
non-monetary costs => Spyware and Adware programs are not Freeware.

> But they are not synonyms. That's all I'm sayin'.


Agree. Some FOSS apps have monetary or non-monetary costs. Freeware and
FOSS are complementary terms if you use sensible definitions.
Freeware may or nay not also be FOSS. FOSS may or may not also be Freeware.

Susan
--
Posted to alt.comp.freeware
Search alt.comp.freeware (or read it online):
http://www.google.com/advanced_group....comp.freeware
Pricelessware & ACF: http://www.pricelesswarehome.org
Pricelessware: http://www.pricelessware.org (not maintained)


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Digital Camera review in Consumer Reports November issue Victek Digital Photography 1 10-01-2007 04:59 PM
Freeware windows digital photo editors (did we miss any)? Wlm Singleton Digital Photography 80 07-11-2007 03:23 AM
Re: Consumer Reports rated digital photo editors including freeware Wlm Singleton Digital Photography 3 07-03-2007 10:37 AM
Consumer Reports digital camera reviews Digital Photography 67 06-17-2007 08:16 AM
Digital Photography RFD: rec.photo.digital.slr vs rec.photo.digital.slr-systems? Lionel Digital Photography 16 09-17-2004 12:48 PM



Advertisments