←back to thread

IrfanView

(www.irfanview.com)
520 points omnibrain | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.355s | source
Show context
instagraham ◴[] No.39876705[source]
Why are most comments referring to having used this in the past tense? I was under the impression that it was still the best image viewer in town, on Windows at least
replies(15): >>39876768 #>>39876791 #>>39876805 #>>39876840 #>>39876941 #>>39876948 #>>39876972 #>>39877073 #>>39877116 #>>39877295 #>>39877296 #>>39877319 #>>39877579 #>>39878017 #>>39878986 #
Rinzler89 ◴[] No.39876768[source]
Because of a few things:

1. Windows 11 now ships with quite a decent and powerful image viewer/editor that covers most average users' use cases, therefore lowering the demand from people to go out of their way to find alternatives, like in the Windows XP days, which is a good thing (less likely to go download malware from the first Google result of "image viewer for Windows XP").

2. PC usage behavior has changed a lot since then. Many people don't even have PCs at home anymore, and people now have most of their pics in the cloud or on their phone or some external NAS that comes with it's own browser viewer app, instead of hoarding them all on their home PC hard drive, further lowering the need to seek out dedicated image viewers to manage giant offline collections of digital camera pics(I mean I still do, but I'm a minority nowadays).

These two factors combined meant the death of the third party PC image viewer app. Yeah, Irfan might be "the best", but the need for the best in this sector has declined significantly, and most users are now fine with "good enough".

replies(3): >>39877200 #>>39877246 #>>39877527 #
formerly_proven ◴[] No.39877246[source]
Does the Windows 11 photo viewer still have that gross flickering when changing images and absurdly slow startup that the Windows 10 photo viewer added when they replaced the old Vista/7 viewer, which had none of these issues?
replies(1): >>39877386 #
Rinzler89 ◴[] No.39877386[source]
What flickering do you have? I don't see any. As for startup time, I dunno, seems to open in less than half a second for me, though on a relatively high end laptop. On a 10 year old machine it might suffer.
replies(1): >>39877520 #
nutrie ◴[] No.39877520[source]
I rarely use Windows these days, but IrfanView feels lightning fast compared to the built-in Photos app or whatever they call it. I started using IV I think on Win 98 and it's still as snappy and reliable as it always has been.
replies(1): >>39877648 #
hilbert42 ◴[] No.39877648[source]
I haven't used the latest Windows viewer because I'm no longer prepared to upgrade to the latest versions of Windows, but the old version was a dog of a program compared to IrfanView, it was slow, couldn't display many formats and would misbehave if the image files were damaged.

And yes, at times it flickers and or images can tear.

replies(1): >>39879086 #
1. Rinzler89 ◴[] No.39879086[source]
The recent photo viewer is great. I never felt the need to install Irfan anymore just to view photos since .. a long time now.

I mean why would I? If all I need is viewing a couple of photos every now and then, cropping and rotating one or two and drawing some circles on them to highlight something in a screenshot and Windows already does that then why bother with Irfan other than habit and nostalgia.