Have been using Photostructure for 3 weeks now. First with the Windows version, I then tried to install the “Node” version which did not work (there is another post about this). Yesterday I installed the “Docker Compose” version on my Windows 11, it was super easy and works perfectly, both pictures, tags and videos.
I can read in other posts that you are working on the Windows version, however have some issues.
My idea is to skip the Windows version if this one is creating problems in maintaining the combined code base for Photostructure. Instead of solving Windows, focus on new features. Think a lot of people would like that and maybe also for you (I have no idea, however I do not like solving backwards problem, I like creating new stuff)
I came up with the idea as the install of Docker Compose on Windows and the Photostructure in Docker is a super easy and fast process. Was done in less than 10min. Most problematic part was figuring out how to define the volumes, as Windows do not have normal mount points… I can make an easy to follow guide and be happy to share other expierences on this.
I’d be interested in knowing how you’re running Docker on Windows. My experience thus far has been using Docker Desktop, which seems to eat all of my system resources.
I use Docker Desktop. Have not looked deeply into syste,m usage, however agree it uses quite a lot of memory, like 2GB on my machine. On the CPU part, 2 processes, “Surragte COM” and the WmmemSL" is using some CPU, however not a lot.
The photostructure is fast and responsive when used, both local and from another windows pc.
I’ve advocated for that myself in the past and I continue to believe it’s the only reasonable option for a tool entirely developed and managed by a single person. But there is a perception that asking windows users to install separate software (either docker or node) would be too much to ask (same for mac version).
I think @mrm 's position is totally reasonable given that one of his primary target users are older generations that have limited computer literacy. There’s no way that my mother, for instance, could get Photostructure running on Docker Desktop or Node.
The fact that @mrm is targeting the elderly population is news to me, and if true, very misguided. It seems to me to be more for the self-hosting crowd, and those are either very computer litterate, or at least adventurous enough to try.
The computer illiterate folks are better off relying on chromebooks and cloud services (like Google Photos), especially there are a host of other concerns they’re not equipped to deal with, like backups. (OK, that’s maybe a bit of a ‘hot take’)
I also get that sometimes even computer litterate folks don’t want to deal with the hassle, especially if they do IT stuff all day long at work. I’ve seen that argument being made here too, I won’t name names. I suspect they too would prefer for @mrm to release more often though.
I think a good compromise would be to create an installer that installs the dependencies (like node) and PS itself. I understand that would still be a piece of code to maintain, but it should require basically no change while the code for photostructure itself innovates at a more rapid pace. Perhaps @mrm could even contract that work out.
@KHV8 thanks for taking the time to share your experience, and welcome to PhotoStructure!
PhotoStructure users have tended to be 30+, and skew heavily towards the tech-savvy, but there are many users who really aren’t comfortable with docker or the command line, which is why I built the Desktop build in the first place.
I picked TypeScript (over something like go or rust) specifically for Electron desktop support, but that’s proven to be a problematic choice: packaging has gone through a ton of churn in the past several years, and it’s anything but “turnkey.”
My goal is to help anyone with a digital pile of photos and videos to use PhotoStructure in a way that helps them extract value and delight. We can call it a stretch goal.
For people looking in this thread for how to get docker to work on Windows.
It was easy to install, however have some limitations I have not been able to solve yet.
It is most probably related to the Docker settings in relation to memory. The problem is that searches for a “tag” having a lot of pictures (like 2000+) fails after some time.
These searches works with the Windows version of photostructure.
Maybe… Or maybe it’s a bug that should be evaluated as such. The current docker version vs the last windows version are vastly different (significant rewrites) so I would not assume it’s anything specific to your setup.
Have used some time to look into Docker Desktop on Winows and how to optimize it for Docker Compose installation of Photostructure.
Besides the error I mention above, I belive Docker Desktop provide some limits to system speed and have a huge overhead on execution of the docker installs… The system usage and speed of photostructure in a Docker on windows is resulting in very slow response.
My initial testing did not show this, as it was a test install with a few hundreds pictures. When moving to my full library with app 15.000 pictures, it got slow.
I will not use more time on this setup. Will look into the .node installation once more, might be better.