Software Centre 5.0 designs

[CreativeReach]

Just awesome stuff to come ;)
http://cdn.omgubuntu.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/H1K8ch.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/ZvsZ0.jpg

[CreativeReach]

and.............

http://cdn.omgubuntu.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/T0svBh.jpg

[not found]

Will be interesting to see it evolve...


404

[dext]

here's the link if anyone wants to read about it http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2011/06/the-new-ubuntu-software-centre-mock-ups-hint-at-great-things-to-come/

[cariboo907]

Thank goodness for synaptic being available, so I don't have to use the Software Center.

[ronacc]

seeing this I don't know whether to laugh or cry .

[dext]

matches the new forum if there was a ugly smiley i'd use it :p

[ranch hand]

Thank goodness for synaptic being available, so I don't have to use the Software Center.
Me too.

That would be tough to take.

[silex89]

I don't know why the rants... I love the new look :D. Of course, Synaptic is still very handy, but I don't (or can't) see anything bad about this :S



Regards :D

[Merk42]

It's a good thing we all have 1080p screens tilted vertically to use this.

[meborc]

Me too.

That would be tough to take.

You can always use apt :)

But don't you agree that for wider acceptance of linux this is a good step!?!

[coffeecat]

Will it prevent newbies from installing usbmount, pysdm, ntfs-config and a few other apps that break systems and frighten the horses? If so, I don't care what it looks like; it'll get my vote. :-s

[StrayEddy]

Sexy designs, new look that fits with Unity (specially the second screenshot) ;)

[Jacobonbuntu]

This is not serious, right? (is it?)
Please keep that adhd-kid away from the computer...\\:D/

[akand074]

This is gorgeous. Actually some quality to it. I don't see any reason to attack it. Synaptic is great and I use it more often. But 1) this allows you to actually browse through the selection of applications really nicely when you don't really have anything you're actually looking for 2) Expecting the average computer user to use Synaptic is absurd.

If that software centre rolls out looking that good and being intuitive to use, then this will be the single best thing Canonical has done for Ubuntu as a large scale OS, hands down.

[ronacc]

I can see 2 potential problems with the layout as shown .

1 The problems caused by the colors and contrast for people with some visual conditions has already been discussed in another thread .

2 The imbeded advertisements . I realize that advertising pays for the web but to have what amounts to adware included as default is going to be offensive to many , myself included .

[Jacobonbuntu]

I can see 2 potential problems with the layout as shown .

1 The problems caused by the colors and contrast for people with some visual conditions has already been discussed in another thread .

2 The imbeded advertisements . I realize that advertising pays for the web but to have what amounts to adware included as default is going to be offensive to many , myself included .

I 100% agree....

[Framli]

I mostly agree about ads, but I'm suddenly asking myself what the difference is between the Featured section in USC 4.0 and what is considered here as advertisement.
If those big banners were about packages from the USC 4.0 Featured section, would that still be a problem? Is it just about screen space dedicated to a specific package?

[teh603]

Looks like its designed to compete with the iTunes store, and other mobile app stores. Me, I think I'll just stick with kpackagekit or muon.

So when is Ubuntu going to start embedding itself in tablets the way Win8 and Red Flag are starting to? :-k

[akand074]

I can see 2 potential problems with the layout as shown .

1 The problems caused by the colors and contrast for people with some visual conditions has already been discussed in another thread .

2 The imbeded advertisements . I realize that advertising pays for the web but to have what amounts to adware included as default is going to be offensive to many , myself included .

1. How many people will actually sit and stare at the software centre for a prolonged period of time. And that's a weak reason regardless. Just sitting at a computer close to the monitor is bad as it is. Really, probably close to everything in the world has some sort of side effect or detrimental side. This is insignificant and I doubt any company has ever even thought about it twice.

2. It's not adware... people over complain about ads. First of all, advertisement is good, especially when it's got personalization. You get to see what's out there and cool things come up that often you'd like to check out. And second of all it keeps things free. It's those damn popups that come up in your face that are annoying and interrupt you.

[Simian Man]

It's a good time to be a Fedora user is all I have to say...

[meborc]

I can see 2 potential problems with the layout as shown .

1 The problems caused by the colors and contrast for people with some visual conditions has already been discussed in another thread .

2 The imbeded advertisements . I realize that advertising pays for the web but to have what amounts to adware included as default is going to be offensive to many , myself included .

people who use software stores (itunes, android market etc) are used to the colors and bling and flashy things. they even expect it.

people who know what they need and don't care about the bling will not use the software centre anyway

for me personally, this will be just another cool thing to show my friends :) I don't know how much i will use it though...


the ad thing - as i understand this allows software developers to make a nice "page" for their software. to show off the capabilities and features with a nice shiny ad instead of a boring icon and a block of text

[meborc]

It's a good time to be a Fedora user is all I have to say...

yes... jpeg-turbo :D awesome!

[Jacobonbuntu]

1. How many people will actually sit and stare at the software centre for a prolonged period of time. And that's a weak reason regardless. Just sitting at a computer close to the monitor is bad as it is. Really, probably close to everything in the world has some sort of side effect or detrimental side. This is insignificant and I doubt any company has ever even thought about it twice.

2. It's not adware... people over complain about ads. First of all, advertisement is good, especially when it's got personalization. You get to see what's out there and cool things come up that often you'd like to check out. And second of all it keeps things free. It's those damn popups that come up in your face that are annoying and interrupt you.

It is a bit strange to discuss something that may never be there as it is presented now, but the psychological effect is not a rational thing, measured in time spent looking at it. How many people spend hours to find the right wallpaper, something they will never see when they are working (I suppose [-(). Still is an important part of their environment. The software-centre is part of the control-tools on my computer, where I want no uninvited intruders.


Unity I find a "less disturbing environment", this shouting presentation of applications is the opposite, it supposes I am deaf and blind. I would have to wear sun glasses to stay calm.

[MBybee]

Well, I for one like it.

I think it's perhaps a bit... over the top? But still a great idea.

[ronacc]

1. How many people will actually sit and stare at the software centre for a prolonged period of time. And that's a weak reason regardless. Just sitting at a computer close to the monitor is bad as it is. Really, probably close to everything in the world has some sort of side effect or detrimental side. This is insignificant and I doubt any company has ever even thought about it twice.

2. It's not adware... people over complain about ads. First of all, advertisement is good, especially when it's got personalization. You get to see what's out there and cool things come up that often you'd like to check out. And second of all it keeps things free. It's those damn popups that come up in your face that are annoying and interrupt you.

as presented at the start of this thread the contrast between the file names an the discriptions is very extreme not to mention the garish orange bling , and this can cause real problems for some people .
I never said advertising was bad , I however do not think it has any place in a default piece of system software .

[lucazade]

From a gtk application I would expect gtk widgets and not an embedded web page.
Maybe if it will be available also from a browser could be a nice feature.. We'll see, are just mockups.

[Dragonbite]

On one hand, it looks pretty good, with colors and more information than usual. Makes me think of a website.

On the other hand, it looks like a cluttered website.

The color and images look pretty cool, and brings a "finished" spit-shine to the overall feel. It turns a basic system management tool into something one is enticed to browse through. In a way, they are turning a textbook into a glossy magazine.

What I don't like about it is that it is too cluttered. Color and gloss is good, but there comes a limit.


LENGTHY REVIEW:

https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-U6y7V-3dja0/Tfo5FmkjZXI/AAAAAAAADT8/5onrozbwzH0/s144/H1K8ch.jpg
This one isn't so bad. The advertisement along the top breaks up the tiles and menus. It is fairly pleasing to the eye and I like the larger images for the applications. It isn't overdone with colors and each section is clearly defined. Links (text) is grouped and images are grouped so it isn't over-confusing or looks "scattered"

Unfortunately it is very vertically orientated and as such you will probably miss the lower 1/2 of the page (Top rated, Most Popular, Latest Demos, Latest Reviews and Twitter)! The advertisement along the top could be shrunken some (vertically) and the whole row right underneath could be removed. This would move Categories and Recommendations up. If these recommendations are tightened up it could show 5x3 items and still bring the hidden parts on the bottom half up and possibly expose that there is more.


https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-NKJwcNJwpV8/Tfo5Hq_DZXI/AAAAAAAADUA/Afp21aRaZw0/s144/ZvsZ0.jpg
What I like about this one is that there is less "fluff". It is more straight-forward as to what it is offering or what its purpose is than the previous one. The individual entries are more compact yet still readable with pleasing images for each application.

Again, the banner along the top is a nice touch, but could be reduced to make more space for the meat of the application. Again, the lower half (Most Popular, and Top Rated) is not even going to be noticed.

I like the way the icons for applications are shown with the top banner. I think it would be cool if one can scan left-and-right through them and if, like hte banner, they were slightly smaller. Keep the spacing, but make them 75-80% the size they are now.

I see the need to separate the entries (under Recommended for you and New) and I do like the compact aspect of them but the dotted lines make them look like coupons. That may have been the desired result, but I'm not so keen on it. Maybe increase the visibility of the alternating shading like is done in the New category.

I think the Menu listing needs work, but I don't know just how yet.


https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-WTMCG-0dHr0/Tfo5JNug-NI/AAAAAAAADUE/nxSfVqUOwnw/s144/T0svBh.jpg
I think I like the tabbed view of the sections better than the others, with that shading offering a subtle separation from each other while the items listed are efficiently laid out the way I like.

I think my favorite part of this page is the section between the top tabbed group (What's Hot) and the next one (Top Rated). I could see tiles like that for a larger category selection styled page covering all of the categories, even in place of the entire Menu selection!

While the list of icons under the banner and above the sections shows more at once, the style of those icons and the images in the sections below are disconnected and confusing. The images in the lower sections are more appealing, while the icons are more efficient to a degree. The vertical icons to the left of the banner makes it feel like they are trying to jam as many of those icons as you can, in just about any place you can find.

The menu looks pretty good, but I don't think the clip on top of it serves any purpose or helps the design in any way.

Conclusion

I like some of the direction they are heading with making it more interactive and graphically appealing, but I think the vertical layout and separations need tweaking.

I like the magazine-like view
I like the banner along the top but wish it were smaller
I lke the images for the applications more than just the icon.
I like the compact information for applications (image, text, stars, "free", etc.)
I like the categorical view in the 3rd one


There.. now I just wonder if anybody's actually going to read all of this. ;)

[meborc]

snip...

There.. now I just wonder if anybody's actually going to read all of this. ;)

Read it and agree with most of your points :) glad to see someone is using creative criticism instead of the good old plain criticism so abundant today

[ronacc]

I generaly like the "new look " and agrree with dragonbite's points . Leaving my misgivings about the ad's aside the major request I would make is for darker text for the descriptions , The bright icons and bold text for the app names makes it hard to read the small and almost grayed out descriptions .

[collisionystm]

I see evernote in there? Is this really coming to Ubuntu?

[collisionystm]

oh and btw. I think the software centre mock-ups look absolutely amazing. I love the direction this is going in.

[sanderd17]

I generaly like the "new look " and agrree with dragonbite's points . Leaving my misgivings about the ad's aside the major request I would make is for darker text for the descriptions , The bright icons and bold text for the app names makes it hard to read the small and almost grayed out descriptions .

Wouldn't it be better to use the things you mention when the high contrast mode is on? Users with good sight normally prefer less contrast.

I also agree with most of dragonbites comments, but I wonder how much they use GTK. Like now, I'm using gnome-shell on Ubuntu. And most apps have the scrollbars from gnome-shell and some (like the software center) have Ayatana scroll bars. Using this kinds of hard coded designs can also be bad if a user wants to change the theme.

[tubunu]

This looks impressive although I will stick to apt-get commandline. But for an average Joe coming to Linux this will rock.

[teh603]

2. It's not adware... people over complain about ads. First of all, advertisement is good, especially when it's got personalization. You get to see what's out there and cool things come up that often you'd like to check out. And second of all it keeps things free. It's those damn popups that come up in your face that are annoying and interrupt you.Its all fun and games until the ads start installing malware. The only halfway safe way to have ads is to limit them to animated GIFs for banners, nothing scripted at all, no flash/shockwave ads, none of that. Just simple animated GIFs.

[Simian Man]

yes... jpeg-turbo :D awesome!

Uhh, I don't know why you mentioned that, but I'd rather have improvements that actually make things better than ones that add hideous new UIs filled with ads.

[el_koraco]

Uhh, I don't know why you mentioned that, but I'd rather have improvements that actually make things better than ones that add hideous new UIs filled with ads.

If Canonical agrees to the initiative, and releases USC from the contributor agreement, you'll have the interface in Fedora too. Via Appstream.

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=OTA1MA

[zekopeko]

If Canonical agrees to the initiative, and releases USC from the contributor agreement, you'll have the interface in Fedora too. Via Appstream.

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=OTA1MA

Nothing is stopping Fedora from having USC. The contributor agreement thing is mostly FUD from people who don't want Canonical potentially making money from the code they mostly wrote.

[zekopeko]

I like the 3rd one the most if they lose the left side icons on the banner. Either way the design is solid but needs more cleaning up and less clutter.

[akand074]

Its all fun and games until the ads start installing malware. The only halfway safe way to have ads is to limit them to animated GIFs for banners, nothing scripted at all, no flash/shockwave ads, none of that. Just simple animated GIFs.

Sure... when Canonical decides to support malware that'll happen.

[ronacc]

canonical may not support it but if the possibility even exists someone will exploit it . The desire to extract information that will help them manipulate us is impossible for some advertisers to resist .

[ranch hand]

You can always use apt :)

But don't you agree that for wider acceptance of linux this is a good step!?!
I do not see this as something that will have that result.

There seems to be a line of thinking that goes something like this;
MS (and Mac to a lesser extent) do things this way so we should too.

This, I believe, has some merit but not excessively. What the "average user" is looking for is hard to pin down. I think that right now the plan seems to be to make an imitation of Mac and MS OS' for Linux. I do not think this will work. I see no incentive to change in that approach. MS and Mac are very good at what they do, why go to a cheap imitation.

I run boinc full bore on my box. There is one project that I run work units for that started by offering WUs (work units) only for LInux. Another changed the way theirs ran so that it is 4 times faster than it was, Linux WUs changed better than a year ago, MS WUs changed 2 months ago.

What this has to do with the current discussion is the strengths and weakness' of different basic systems.

MS was developed to be a single user work station. It was not intended for research type math (pure number crunching. It can do number crunching, just not as well.

Unix was developed before there was a "work station". It was developed to crunch numbers. It is still around and quite popular for exactly that sort of job. It is, to a huge extent, being replaced by Linux because you can have a much more usable workstation environment, in a multi users setting on Linux than on Unix.

This is one of the strengths of Linux. There are several more including the wonderful command line interface. These are the things that should be built upon if you really want to compete with the big boys, not imitating the others.

To get a little rural here, a Belgiun will never be a Thuroughbred. By breeding to increase the "functionality" of the heavy horse so that it has a better gait and moves faster it can be used for a riding horse but also as a great cart horse and still as a great draft horse for really heavy work. Look at the Percheron and see what I mean.

I really do not think that the way to increase exceptance of Linux is to go for glitzy crass commercialism. That niche is already taken and you will not catch up. You need to offer something else, something more.

In other words if you want Linux to move ahead it needs to be Linux. Linux that offers the user power over their box, freedom from exactly the things USC represents in its current and, it appears, future iterations.

[ronacc]

well said , you just need to look at the fate of the distros that try to be windows look a likes .

[cariboo907]

Our user base is changing, I see quite a few users, that use their system the same way they use Windows, no logins, no separate accounts for different users, and especially using the system the way it came with only superficial customizing, I'm even starting to see complaints about having to install extra applications for increased functionality. If the Software Center eventually becomes like the mockups, these types of users will probably love it.

I personally dislike the Software Center because of it's lack of feedback, I prefer a gui for updating and installing apps, so I'll stick with synaptic.

[Jacobonbuntu]

Our user base is changing, I see quite a few users, that use their system the same way they use Windows, no logins, no separate accounts for different users, and especially using the system the way it came with only superficial customizing, I'm even starting to see complaints about having to install extra applications for increased functionality. If the Software Center eventually becomes like the mockups, these types of users will probably love it.

I personally dislike the Software Center because of it's lack of feedback, I prefer a gui for updating and installing apps, so I'll stick with synaptic.


.....This is exactly one of the main reasons I ran away from Windows, dead weight for no functional purpose. I consider myself as a representative of the (ex-) users of Macintosh and Windows that never used the command-line before. Although I am kind of an illiterate at this point, I am starting to feel the beauty of it: exact, effective and most of all clean.
I guess some people choose Linux as just another kind of Windows, but I am definitely not the only one moving to Linux to "lose weight", and although I like a well-designed desktop (or maybe because of that), a software control center like this seems awful to me. I am not interested in What Michelle's Dell is running, I want do do my work without being disturbed.

but probably we are talking about nothing. It's not april's fools day is it?

[zekopeko]

canonical may not support it but if the possibility even exists someone will exploit it . The desire to extract information that will help them manipulate us is impossible for some advertisers to resist .

Paranoid thinking by Linux users scared of change; News at 5.

[ilovelinux33467]

Not a fan of it just looking at the designs.

[ronacc]

Paranoid thinking by Linux users scared of change; News at 5.

just because you are paranoid it doesn't mean no one is out to get you : Malware at 11 .

[el_koraco]

Nothing is stopping Fedora from having USC. The contributor agreement thing is mostly FUD from people who don't want Canonical potentially making money from the code they mostly wrote.

I don't see RedHat accepting USC as a frontend for AppStream while it's "burdened" with the contributor agreement. Novell might, but they're not quite so heavyweight.

[zekopeko]

I do not see this as something that will have that result.

There seems to be a line of thinking that goes something like this;
MS (and Mac to a lesser extent) do things this way so we should too.

<snip>
-
As always your viewpoint is archaic and elitist. What you suggest is "lets spread freedom but only to the select few". For the majority of people computers are tools not idols to be worshiped.

And the absurd notion that Linux should be Linux and there is no way to ever surpass Windows or OSX in what you call glitzy "crass commercialism" is to be willfully blind to Android's success.

[zekopeko]

just because you are paranoid it doesn't mean no one is out to get you : Malware at 11 .

Please. We are talking about an ad for app inside a, wait for it, an app store. I bet that those evil PNG images are going to steal your identity. The horror.:lolflag:

What's next? You are going to protest in front of department stores because they have mannequins in store windows advertising clothes the store sells? "Officer that mannequin is stealing my info!" :lolflag:

[zekopeko]

I don't see RedHat accepting USC as a frontend for AppStream while it's "burdened" with the contributor agreement. Novell might, but they're not quite so heavyweight.

So Red Hat dictates what the community does?

[tanvsb]

Hi, I'm using ubuntu 10.10. for last few days I'm having problem with my software centre. I cant install any software from there. It says either I dont hv any net connection or cant install from untrusted areas. But I have no internet connetion problem and can install those from synaptic. Can anyone help me please?

[ronacc]

-
As always your viewpoint is archaic and elitist. What you suggest is "lets spread freedom but only to the select few". For the majority of people computers are tools not idols to be worshiped.

And the absurd notion that Linux should be Linux and there is no way to ever surpass Windows or OSX in what you call glitzy "crass commercialism" is to be willfully blind to Android's success.

that is not what he is saying at all . the point he is making is that the way forward is not through imitation but by presenting a clear alternative to the bloat and malware of windows and the anal retentiveness of OSX .

[teh603]

Please. We are talking about an ad for app inside a, wait for it, an app store. I bet that those evil PNG images are going to steal your identity. The horror.:lolflag:

What's next? You are going to protest in front of department stores because they have mannequins in store windows advertising clothes the store sells? "Officer that mannequin is stealing my info!" :lolflag:So am I the only one who remembers ads installing viruses on peoples' computers? Its happened to GaiaOnline, wowhead.com, and quite a few others as well. I'm pretty sure its happened to MySpace and Facebook as well.

Its wouldn't be Canonical's doing, but the ad provider's. Like I said, all it takes is malicious Flash or Javascript code in one of those flashy little scripted ads that plays video or gives you a little game to play.

I'm aware of what causes me to enter my sudo password, every single time. How many Mac and Windows users aren't?

[zekopeko]

that is not what he is saying at all . the point he is making is that the way forward is not through imitation but by presenting a clear alternative to the bloat and malware of windows and the anal retentiveness of OSX .

I don't know what is the last version of Windows or OSX you used but neither of those is bloated. OSX was always a nice clean design and Windows is moving in that direction as well.

[el_koraco]

So Red Hat dictates what the community does?

Well, for a project the size of AppStream, I doubt the community would just go ahead and do stuff that the mothership doesn't condone. I might be wrong, though. Was just saying that there's also a move towards a USC-like interface in Fedora.

[meborc]

EDIT: was in a bad mood... :) deleted my comment after taking a long breath

[ronacc]

I don't know what is the last version of Windows or OSX you used but neither of those is bloated. OSX was always a nice clean design and Windows is moving in that direction as well.

where did I say that OSX is bloated ? in answer to your question OSX 10.6 ,win 7 . I stand by my statement as posted , though I will admit some of the bloat in windows is installed by OEM's not ms

[zekopeko]

So am I the only one who remembers ads installing viruses on peoples' computers? Its happened to GaiaOnline, wowhead.com, and quite a few others as well. I'm pretty sure its happened to MySpace and Facebook as well.

Its wouldn't be Canonical's doing, but the ad provider's. Like I said, all it takes is malicious Flash or Javascript code in one of those flashy little scripted ads that plays video or gives you a little game to play.

I'm aware of what causes me to enter my sudo password, every single time. How many Mac and Windows users aren't?

You are arguing from a wrong premise. People assumed that USC 5 will have ads served from ad companies which looks to be entirely untrue and a knee jerk reaction by people who haven't examined the mockup in detail.

Their inspiration is the Mac App store which doesn't have ads from 3rd parties. What it has are banners for available applications picked by the App store staff. Go and look at Steam. No ads, simply promotions for new games via big nice banners. No ads with potentially malicious code but simple PNG images.

[zekopeko]

where did I say that OSX is bloated ? in answer to your question OSX 10.6 ,win 7 . I stand by my statement as posted , though I will admit some of the bloat in windows is installed by OEM's not ms

Bloat is in the eye of the beholder. I think that the only way your OS tastes could be satisfied is you doing a minimal OS install and cherry picking packages which is something that most Ubuntu users don't want to do.

[zekopeko]

Well, for a project the size of AppStream, I doubt the community would just go ahead and do stuff that the mothership doesn't condone. I might be wrong, though. Was just saying that there's also a move towards a USC-like interface in Fedora.

The copyright contributor agreement has nothing to do with control of the project but the code. USC is GPLv3. If Fedora wants to do the whole "Not Invented Here" syndrome they can go right ahead.

[teh603]

You are arguing from a wrong premise. People assumed that USC 5 will have ads served from ad companies which looks to be entirely untrue and a knee jerk reaction by people who haven't examined the mockup in detail.

Their inspiration is the Mac App store which doesn't have ads from 3rd parties. What it has are banners for available applications picked by the App store staff. Go and look at Steam. No ads, simply promotions for new games via big nice banners. No ads with potentially malicious code but simple PNG images.Let's see how its implemented. For all we know, it could have Google as an ad provider, and Google's track record for malware-free ads isn't that hot.

[dext]

So Red Hat dictates what the community does?
doesnt shuttleworth do the same

[zekopeko]

Let's see how its implemented. For all we know, it could have Google as an ad provider, and Google's track record for malware-free ads isn't that hot.

I don't think you understood me. Those are banners for applications. Not ads in the classical web sense. Google has nothing to do with this at all.

Go to www.ubuntu.com. Click on the huge banner with the laptop running Ubuntu. Get directed to Ubuntu's download page.

In USC you would click on the banner of the app and get redirected to that app's info screen.

It's ridiculousness that I have to to explain this and yet you continue talking about malware infused web ads.

[IWantFroyo]

Hmmm...

It certainly looks prettier than the current version of the Software Center.

[akand074]

I don't think you understood me. Those are banners for applications. Not ads in the classical web sense. Google has nothing to do with this at all.

Go to www.ubuntu.com (http://www.ubuntu.com). Click on the huge banner with the laptop running Ubuntu. Get directed to Ubuntu's download page.

In USC you would click on the banner of the app and get redirected to that app's info screen.

It's ridiculousness that I have to to explain this and yet you continue talking about malware infused web ads.

I'm just quoting here because I haven't been back to this thread in a while but I read through the posts quickly and I agree completely with every post of zekopeko. It's nice to see there is still people who actually have premise to their arguments rather than the increasingly common "everyone is out to get me" mentality. Being a little skeptical or concerned is good, but you can't actually decide something is that way without actual indisputable support.

[ronacc]

and we are all just speculating on the basis of a conceptual mock up , we won't have anything real to talk about until something goes plop in the repos .

[User3k]

Well I hope it all goes well. If I don't like it I can always use Synaptic or what I usually use aptitude or apt-get. As long as those three, at the very least stay, then go crazy with the software center.

[teh603]

I'm just quoting here because I haven't been back to this thread in a while but I read through the posts quickly and I agree completely with every post of zekopeko. It's nice to see there is still people who actually have premise to their arguments rather than the increasingly common "everyone is out to get me" mentality. Being a little skeptical or concerned is good, but you can't actually decide something is that way without actual indisputable support.I'm not saying "everyone's out to get me." I'm saying that we should proceed with reasonable caution.

[ranch hand]

-
As always your viewpoint is archaic and elitist. What you suggest is "lets spread freedom but only to the select few". For the majority of people computers are tools not idols to be worshiped.

And the absurd notion that Linux should be Linux and there is no way to ever surpass Windows or OSX in what you call glitzy "crass commercialism" is to be willfully blind to Android's success.
I actually have an Android in my right shirt pocket as I type this.

It has a very clean gui, it has no extremely bright colors to attract magpies, it does what it is designed to do. This demonstrates very well the use of the Linux kernel for very diverse things.

This is not what ubuntu is doing with this kind of thing.

If you read, in this thread, post 45 you will see another elitist that has a similar opinion as to what folks that switch are looking for.

I even suspect that Jacobonbuntu is a number of decades younger than I am and easily more in touch with the "modern" computer user than I am.

One of the things that I have to do in my line of work is design things that are easy to use in a hurry by people that are not familiar with that particular piece of equipment. They are familiar with the job that it is to do. I have never yet run into anyone, using these tools that needed it painted bright colors (or painted at all) to improve their "user experience", What they want is to have something that will work every time and work predictably in the various ways that it is intended to do and facilitate getting the job done as fast as possible.

The only worship involved has to do with what the cooks have provided for the meal when the job is done.

What those mock ups look like is some thing that would be worshiped by folks with some sever need for constant distraction from what they need to be doing. That is not a tool, that is entertainment.

Learn the difference.

[meborc]

...

What those mock ups look like is some thing that would be worshiped by folks with some sever need for constant distraction from what they need to be doing. That is not a tool, that is entertainment.

Learn the difference.

Ubuntu is a great tool as you say and i agree with you totally... so why not make Ubuntu great in the entertainment area as well?

Are you really that annoyed by the software centre that Ubuntu as tool will not work for you any more? are they mutually exclusive?

Do you use software centre on a day-to-day bases? really?

[ranch hand]

Ubuntu is a great tool as you say and i agree with you totally... so why not make Ubuntu great in the entertainment area as well?

Are you really that annoyed by the software centre that Ubuntu as tool will not work for you any more? are they mutually exclusive?

Do you use software centre on a day-to-day bases? really?
I have an Ubuntu free box as of 2 weeks ago.

[Dragonbite]

just because you are paranoid it doesn't mean no one is out to get you : Malware at 11 .

You aren't paranoid if they ARE out to get you! ;)


So Red Hat dictates what the community does?

Red Hat dictates what Red Hat does (and somewhat Fedora, though Fedora is a community distro so one would think the community has "some" say). Canonical dictates what Ubuntu does, (though Ubuntu is a community distro so one would think the commonity has "some" say). Attachmante (and Novell before that) dictates what SUSE does (and somewhat openSUSE, though openSUSE is a community distro so one would think the community has "some" say)...

Ultimately it is up to each distro to decide "if" and "when" they use it.

I don't see Red Hat or Fedora using it (maybe Fedora if the circumstances are right) without it going through some careful "cleansing" to Red Hat's standards.

I don't see openSUSE using it unless it can be integrated with their Yast system. There is little to no chance they are going to abandon Yast anytime in the near (or far) future.

[dext]

this is what may come to Fedora and or other Distro's ( something like Software Centre ) http://news.opensuse.org/2011/02/01/bretzn-results-released-into-the-wild/

[ronacc]

the rpm based distros need all the help they can get , I know I was a Suse user for many years . They have nothing to compare to apt/dpkg/synaptic anything would be an improvement .

[dmizer]

What those mock ups look like is some thing that would be worshiped by folks with some sever need for constant distraction from what they need to be doing. That is not a tool, that is entertainment.

Those mockups are a sign of a complete shift in thinking about where software comes from by the mainstream public. No more than a few years ago, many of us were fighting with Windows converts to stop looking for software on google and trying to install something from source because they found it on some website somewhere. We constantly fought people to just search for it in Synaptic. The concept of a software repository directly on the OS was completely foreign.

iTunes and Android's market has brought the idea of a "software repository" to the mainstream. It would be a mistake to ignore this shift and stick with the same old Synaptic. Even if you don't think that the posted mockups are an improvement, I think we can all agree that there's lots of room for improvement over Ubuntu's current software center design.

It shows that Canonical is really paying attention to ways for improving userbase. It shows even more fortitude that they are considering ways of improving userbase even if it is at the expense of some current userbase.

[arpanaut]

@dmizer... brilliant!

Thank you for that perspective.

[dext]

the rpm based distros need all the help they can get , I know I was a Suse user for many years . They have nothing to compare to apt/dpkg/synaptic anything would be an improvement .

yum hypothetically is better than Apt, but both have there pro's an cons, AFAIK nothing new is really being added to APT where as there is to yum. all APT is getting is bug fix's. Yast 3 is much better than previous versions of it. OpenSuse has somehting Newer in it called zypper

[ranch hand]

the rpm based distros need all the help they can get , I know I was a Suse user for many years . They have nothing to compare to apt/dpkg/synaptic anything would be an improvement .
Having gone through just about every "major" Linux distro I could not agree with you more. I always say that I hate rpms. This is not actually true. I do hate, with a passion, every package management system I have used with rpms.

I do not, like some, think that a change to some common package management system across linux is a good idea at this time. First it is not going to work because there are a lot of folks, like me, that think that the obvious thing to do is use .debs and the associated package management.

There are others that think the only thing possible would be to use .rpms and their associated package management because they know it is superior.

We are both probably right, at least to some extent. Someone, sometime, will come up with a system that incorporates the strengths of those 2 systems (and others) into something all together different. And better. Until then we can continue to have flame wars over the best system.

Personally I think that the USC is not good for either system but boy is it a close call for the RH branch (really not trying to start the afore mentioned flame war).

I really need to install a RH branch OS on here again. Been better than a year since I had one and I have no idea where they are, from personal experience, right now.

[cariboo907]

I know at one time PCLOS used rpms along with apt, I don't know if it still does.

[tjeremiah]

I like the first one.

[meeples]

I actually have an Android in my right shirt pocket as I type this.

It has a very clean gui, it has no extremely bright colors to attract magpies, it does what it is designed to do. This demonstrates very well the use of the Linux kernel for very diverse things.

This is not what ubuntu is doing with this kind of thing.

If you read, in this thread, post 45 you will see another elitist that has a similar opinion as to what folks that switch are looking for.

I even suspect that Jacobonbuntu is a number of decades younger than I am and easily more in touch with the "modern" computer user than I am.

One of the things that I have to do in my line of work is design things that are easy to use in a hurry by people that are not familiar with that particular piece of equipment. They are familiar with the job that it is to do. I have never yet run into anyone, using these tools that needed it painted bright colors (or painted at all) to improve their "user experience", What they want is to have something that will work every time and work predictably in the various ways that it is intended to do and facilitate getting the job done as fast as possible.

The only worship involved has to do with what the cooks have provided for the meal when the job is done.

What those mock ups look like is some thing that would be worshiped by folks with some sever need for constant distraction from what they need to be doing. That is not a tool, that is entertainment.

Learn the difference.

The Android Market is bright green.

[ranch hand]

The Android Market is bright green.
That is strange it is up right now on mine with a white background. Many icons of apps are bright but that is understandable seeing that they go on a very small screen and would be hard to see otherwise.

[Reiger]

yum hypothetically is better than Apt, but both have there pro's an cons, AFAIK nothing new is really being added to APT where as there is to yum. all APT is getting is bug fix's. Yast 3 is much better than previous versions of it. OpenSuse has somehting Newer in it called zypper

The point is that theoretically better translates very poorly into the reality of a frustrated user looking to scratch an itch. It's not about which package manager is technically superior, it's about which one can be wielded more effectively with a minimum of effort. RPM based systems, however, seem to go out of their way to be either useless or annoying or frequently both.

It's not encouraging to find you have to type architecture names as part of package names (i.e. 'noarch' or 'all'). It's stupid. That is the job of a proper package manager, to figure that out itself.

[Bart_D]

I don't know why the rants... I love the new look :D. Of course, Synaptic is still very handy, but I don't (or can't) see anything bad about this :S



Regards :D

Agreed. I love it!

I don't use Synaptic anymore. We're not all power users.

Good to see this.

[nrundy]

Thank goodness for synaptic being available, so I don't have to use the Software Center.

+1

Synaptic is pretty cool. Not glamorous looking, but it works great.

[meeples]

That is strange it is up right now on mine with a white background. Many icons of apps are bright but that is understandable seeing that they go on a very small screen and would be hard to see otherwise.

Yea, its bright green with a white background, in much the same way as these mockups have purple/orange with a white background. So i don't see what your complaining about.

[teh603]

Agreed. I love it!

I don't use Synaptic anymore. We're not all power users.

Good to see this.I'm not a power user, but I've had little trouble getting what I want out of Synaptic in Ubuntu. Synaptic in Xandros was another story; somehow it wouldn't resolve dependencies beyond the first tier or so.

I do agree that the idea of a repository is a fairly new thing. I still remember downloading .dmg files on my intel macs, and .hqx files on my classic macs (since anything with a resource fork has to be put in a wrapper before it can be trasferred thru PC land), and thought nothing of it. With Linux, however, installing from the suppositories felt like a more natural thing to do. It was certainly easier than decompressing tarballs and trying to get the files into the right spot.

Its also something I like, although what I don't like is the common implementation where you can *only* install from your platform's app store.

[el_koraco]

It's not about package managers, but packaging policy, which Debian is still ahead on by most accounts. Not as much as in the dark days, though. Yum and zypper are better package managers, though.

[seeker5528]

yum hypothetically is better than Apt, but both have there pro's an cons, AFAIK nothing new is really being added to APT where as there is to yum. all APT is getting is bug fix's. Yast 3 is much better than previous versions of it. OpenSuse has somehting Newer in it called zypper

How much *new* stuff do you think apt needs. ;) You have to keep in mind the apt utilities are low level utilities and it's important not to screw up things that are already working.

http://raphaelhertzog.com/2011/01/21/people-behind-debian-michael-vogt-synaptic-apt-developer/

http://raphaelhertzog.com/2010/12/10/people-behind-debian-david-kalnischkies-an-apt-developer/

http://mvogt.wordpress.com/2010/02/18/goodbye-accidental-abi-breaks/

http://mvogt.wordpress.com/2011/03/10/apt-btrfs-snapshot/

http://mvogt.wordpress.com/2011/05/07/apt-clone/

Later, Seeker

[dext]

ever heard of this? http://wiki.debian.org/Cupt it may one day take over from APT

[cgroza]

And once again, the average users love it, the Gurus throw stones at it.

[CreativeReach]

And once again, the average users love it, the Gurus throw stones at it.
Its Classic, and its Human.

[tumbes2000]

First, I like the proposed possible changes to the USC. However, I am bit surprised that everyone isn't on board with these improvements. I was under the impression that Ubuntu was supposed to bring linux to the masses, so improvements to Ubuntu that would make it easier to switch would be welcome.

[kvv_1986]

And once again, the average users love it, the Gurus throw stones at it.

To be honest, I can't really see the Gurus touching even the current version of USC with a 10 foot pole. :p
I am not even close to being a Guru, but I won't touch USC either, Synaptic is just too good.

However, these design improvements can only make it better, and I hope they implement something.

[NCLI]

First, I like the proposed possible changes to the USC. However, I am bit surprised that everyone isn't on board with these improvements. I was under the impression that Ubuntu was supposed to bring linux to the masses, so improvements to Ubuntu that would make it easier to switch would be welcome.

I think the main problem is that many of the "gurus" expect all users to invest time into learning the platform, while most users just want to start up and use the computer, without having to learn new things.

[misterbiskits]

I don't care for these mockups. As someone said previously I don't care what Michelle is doing on her computer. Far to busy and very, very loud.
I also wonder why every piece of software offered needs the word 'FREE' under it. Free? Yes of course. As opposed to what ... "only $2.99"? Makes me wonder if that's what's to come.

[jerrylamos]

"Eye Candy Galore!" Looks like a "Glitzy Glossy Magazine"! There's very little useful information to me in all the fancy pictures when I'm trying to do some useful applications.

So long as there are choices....

Jerry

[teh603]

i think the main problem is that many of the "gurus" expect all users to invest time into learning the platform, while most users just want to start up and use the computer, without having to learn new things.+1

[meborc]

I don't care for these mockups. As someone said previously I don't care what Michelle is doing on her computer. Far to busy and very, very loud.
I also wonder why every piece of software offered needs the word 'FREE' under it. Free? Yes of course. As opposed to what ... "only $2.99"? Makes me wonder if that's what's to come.

about the price thing... I used to think exactly like you :) I will never pay for anything...

but then I started thinking about the problems linux is facing to gain wide adoption. one of the main reasons people are using windows or mac is that they really need program X or Y and they need support for the program, the knowledge that it will be supported for a long while (foss projects tend to die young)

If there is a place for developers to actually make money on software to linux, the programmes would get better and the whole ecosystem would gain momentum.

I know a lot of you will probably be against me on this one :) and i totally understand... but just think about it for a while

i have no problem in paying a few bucks for a software (and there is a difference between donation and bought software) that i use and love to see it have excellent linux support, do you?

[ronacc]

I think the main problem is that many of the "gurus" expect all users to invest time into learning the platform, while most users just want to start up and use the computer, without having to learn new things.

anytime you use a new OS even if it's just a new version of windows , OSX ,or your favorite distro of linux you have to learn new things , the trick is to make it as painless as possible .

[ronacc]

about the price thing... I used to think exactly like you :) I will never pay for anything...

but then I started thinking about the problems linux is facing to gain wide adoption. one of the main reasons people are using windows or mac is that they really need program X or Y and they need support for the program, the knowledge that it will be supported for a long while (foss projects tend to die young)

If there is a place for developers to actually make money on software to linux, the programmes would get better and the whole ecosystem would gain momentum.

I know a lot of you will probably be against me on this one :) and i totally understand... but just think about it for a while

i have no problem in paying a few bucks for a software (and there is a difference between donation and bought software) that i use and love to see it have excellent linux support, do you?
the problem is that commercial (paid for) software rapidly becomes no longer open source and loses a lot of innovation because of that .

[teh603]

anytime you use a new OS even if it's just a new version of windows , OSX ,or your favorite distro of linux you have to learn new things , the trick is to make it as painless as possible .That's one slight advantage KDE has over Gnome and Unity; it provides a windows-like look and feel.


the problem is that commercial (paid for) software rapidly becomes no longer open source and loses a lot of innovation because of that .That and commercial software has to look at things like platform market share; it "pays" to only develop commercial software for windows because M$ has strongarmed almost every computer manufacturer into using their products.

Course, it could also pay to write platform-agnostic apps for Java, but that's not in anyone's business model these days.

[meborc]

the problem is that commercial (paid for) software rapidly becomes no longer open source and loses a lot of innovation because of that .

open source projects are protected by the license as far as I understand

there will always be open source projects :)

[meeples]

That's one slight advantage KDE has over Gnome and Unity; it provides a windows-like look and feel.


no I don't think so, i've tried kubuntu on windows users and because it looks similar to windows they expect it to work like windows, at least with gnome & unity just looking at it most people accept there will be a bit of a learning curve.

[teh603]

no I don't think so, i've tried kubuntu on windows users and because it looks similar to windows they expect it to work like windows, at least with gnome & unity just looking at it most people accept there will be a bit of a learning curve.Works more like Windows than Windows Vista does, though...

[meeples]

Works more like Windows than Windows Vista does, though...

I dont think vista was as bad as it was made out to be :P

[NCLI]

anytime you use a new OS even if it's just a new version of windows , OSX ,or your favorite distro of linux you have to learn new things , the trick is to make it as painless as possible .
True. I guess I should have written it differently. I think "most users just want to be able to use their computer without investing a significant amount of time in order to learn how to use it" fits better with my original intentions.

Let's face it, Synoptic isn't exactly the most intuitive application.

People want something they know, something familiar, or something easy. Big pictures and smooth graphics is exactly what we need in Ubuntu.

[ronacc]

I think that a lot of the problems that newbes have with synaptic is the rather bizzare way things are often named in linux , gimp for a photoshop clone and pidgin for a chat/im client ? and categorization could be better .

[Merk42]

the problem is that commercial (paid for) software rapidly becomes no longer open source and loses a lot of innovation because of that .
Commercial and Open Source aren't mutually exclusive.
Nor are Open Source and innovation always inclusive.

[ronacc]

Commercial and Open Source aren't mutually exclusive.
Nor are Open Source and innovation always inclusive.

I'll agree somewhat with the first , they are not necessarily mutualy exclusive but often end up that way . as to the second I meant Open source often leads to innovation because it encourages the cross fertilization of ideas .

[Dragonbite]

I also wonder why every piece of software offered needs the word 'FREE' under it. Free? Yes of course. As opposed to what ... "only $2.99"? Makes me wonder if that's what's to come.

Some programs will be free, and that's entirely up to the people making it. What greater chance is there for any major company to offer a paid-for version of what they offer Windows if there is an easy way to distribute it, and a distribution to push it along?

While the far-off dreams would be Office, Photoshop and etc., this may open the door to smaller software packages that are looking to make money and need to find a niche the "big guys" aren't in yet.

I think the USC already has pay-for application.


the problem is that commercial (paid for) software rapidly becomes no longer open source and loses a lot of innovation because of that . I don't think it will make much of a difference is pay-for software is made available right next to FOSS software. It's actually a "selling point" (pun intended ;) )that you are not shacked to only FOSS alternatives if there is a pay-for version you prefer!


no I don't think so, i've tried kubuntu on windows users and because it looks similar to windows they expect it to work like windows, at least with gnome & unity just looking at it most people accept there will be a bit of a learning curve.

I have found it is easier for people to use something that doesn't look like Windows because they are less likely to expect it to behave like Windows. Since they don't expect it to behave like Windows they are more willing to try looking for where that such-and-such link is, before throwing their hands up and saying "this sucks".

I'm not sure what I am going to do about Unity/Gnome 3 yet but for now Gnome 2 is working for me to introduce new users to Linux in a favorable manner.

[ronacc]

I don't think it will make much of a difference is pay-for software is made available right next to FOSS software. It's actually a "selling point" (pun intended ;) )that you are not shacked to only FOSS alternatives if there is a pay-for version you prefer!

I did not mean that anything was wrong with commercial software or that it should not be available through USC . What I was trying to say is that a I would hate to see a mass movement of apps we know and love to paid for . I am a business man myself so I have nothing against someone making a living. However when I look at the commercial software (and OS ) industry where the favorite pastime seems to be suing each other over intellectual property I shudder . I would also hate to see commercial software given "pride of place" over open source alternatives .

[meborc]

you bring out two points as i understand:


I did not mean that anything was wrong with commercial software or that it should not be available through USC . What I was trying to say is that a I would hate to see a mass movement of apps we know and love to paid for .

apps that you know and love are open source and are protected by a licence, meaning that there will always be code you can fork or distribute without paying for it


I would also hate to see commercial software given "pride of place" over open source alternatives .

this is a different story. will canonical give the bigger ad-space to paid software? will the ad appearance be random? so far there has been a sub-category for paid apps, will it still be as easy to ignore them?

[sanderd17]

one of the main reasons people are using windows or mac is that they really need program X or Y and they need support for the program, the knowledge that it will be supported for a long while (foss projects tend to die young)

They tend to die young, but their code lives on. So the files you have stay compatible and the way of working too.


open source projects are protected by the license as far as I understand

there will always be open source projects :)

Open source projects aren't always protected by their license. It is easy to turn Android into a closed source project.

See this article: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13556_3-20071811-61/the-open-source-license-landscape-is-changing/

[meborc]

They tend to die young, but their code lives on. So the files you have stay compatible and the way of working too.

yes, but for some strange reason people feel more secure if they actually pay for something. Then you have the feel and sometimes even proof of "ownership" and the warranties that come with that.


Open source projects aren't always protected by their license. It is easy to turn Android into a closed source project.

See this article: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13556_3-20071811-61/the-open-source-license-landscape-is-changing/

there are always examples of how not to licence your code :) but if you do have a correct licence, then legally (again, there are always people who bend the rules) your software stays open

[Dragonbite]

I did not mean that anything was wrong with commercial software or that it should not be available through USC . What I was trying to say is that a I would hate to see a mass movement of apps we know and love to paid for . I am a business man myself so I have nothing against someone making a living. However when I look at the commercial software (and OS ) industry where the favorite pastime seems to be suing each other over intellectual property I shudder . I would also hate to see commercial software given "pride of place" over open source alternatives .

Understood. At this point the number of pay-for applications is nothing to be alarmed about, but if it did grow and people flocked to the pay-for versions over the FOSS, then what's the inspiration for the FOSS versions?

While there is little fear of it now, what would happen in the future if MS Office, Photoshop, iTunes and others become available? How would LibreOffice, Gimp and Banshee fare?


At least for now, there is little fear of that happening, but as Linux becomes more popular this is a valid concern.

One plus is that the pay-for applications cannot be distributed pre-installed on Linux legally.

[ronacc]

One plus is that the pay-for applications cannot be distributed pre-installed on Linux legally.

not so , think RHEL and Suse ( not open Suse ) and some others where the distro has both open source and paid for components .

[teh603]

I did not mean that anything was wrong with commercial software or that it should not be available through USC . What I was trying to say is that a I would hate to see a mass movement of apps we know and love to paid for . I am a business man myself so I have nothing against someone making a living. However when I look at the commercial software (and OS ) industry where the favorite pastime seems to be suing each other over intellectual property I shudder . I would also hate to see commercial software given "pride of place" over open source alternatives .Honestly, I don't think its likely to happen. The main purpose looks like opening the door for the old shareware model.


Understood. At this point the number of pay-for applications is nothing to be alarmed about, but if it did grow and people flocked to the pay-for versions over the FOSS, then what's the inspiration for the FOSS versions?

While there is little fear of it now, what would happen in the future if MS Office, Photoshop, iTunes and others become available? How would LibreOffice, Gimp and Banshee fare?Lessee, MS Office and Photoshop are not part of the default loadout, and cost something like $300. Libre/OpenOffice and GIMP are (well, GIMP would be if Canonical would go with a DVD image instead of just a CD one), and are free to use with a bit of a learning curve. So yeah, FOSS isn't in that big of a danger, as long as the default loadout doesn't change that much.

Not going to touch iTunes since Apple distributes it for free. That's for Ubuntu One to deal with, if the Ubuntu One team ever gets off its butt and writes clients for stuff other than Gnome and Windoze.

[dmizer]

not so , think RHEL and Suse ( not open Suse ) and some others where the distro has both open source and paid for components .

As interesting as this topic is, it's off topic for this thread.

I'd like to suggest that you take this conversation to a separate thread please.

[nrundy]

the thing I really love about Synaptic is how I can install and uninstall multiple applications all at once. I select everything I want and then click Apply. Lovely!

I haven't figured out how to do this in Ubuntu Software Center. Can USC do this? If it can't, I don't see how it will ever replace Synaptic.

[Jacobonbuntu]

the thing I really love about Synaptic is how I can install and uninstall multiple applications all at once. I select everything I want and then click Apply. Lovely!

I haven't figured out how to do this in Ubuntu Software Center. Can USC do this? If it can't, I don't see how it will ever replace Synaptic.


as it is now, it can be done even better in the software center, just go on "shopping" as another application is being installed (go back in the directory at the top of the window).

have a good time!
Jacob

[nrundy]

as it is now, it can be done even better in the software center, just go on "shopping" as another application is being installed (go back in the directory at the top of the window).

have a good time!
Jacob

This isn't the same though.

With Synaptic I can install a fresh copy of Ubuntu. then pull out a list I amde of all the apps I installed on my last box. browse through Synaptic selecting what I want to install. Click APPLY and then go make a cup of coffee while it installs. When I return my box has everything installed on it that it did before I reinstalled ubuntu.

USC can't do this far as I can tell.

[Jacobonbuntu]

This isn't the same though.

With Synaptic I can install a fresh copy of Ubuntu. then pull out a list I amde of all the apps I installed on my last box. browse through Synaptic selecting what I want to install. Click APPLY and then go make a cup of coffee while it installs. When I return my box has everything installed on it that it did before I reinstalled ubuntu.

USC can't do this far as I can tell.


AHA,
no, correct, USC starts instantly if you choose to install an application, but it does allow you to go on. I too think that's an advantage of synaptic, right after a fresh install you can choose the whole bunch at once and walk away while it is installed. Also I think synaptic is better taking care of dependencies in general.

[nrundy]

I agree about the dependencies.

USC is nice and easy to look at. But it does not give you the power and freedom and control that Synaptic does. If I had to pick between the two and could only have one--I'd pick Synaptic.

[MBybee]

AHA,
no, correct, USC starts instantly if you choose to install an application, but it does allow you to go on. I too think that's an advantage of synaptic, right after a fresh install you can choose the whole bunch at once and walk away while it is installed. Also I think synaptic is better taking care of dependencies in general.

I would argue that's actually the point of apt-get - just toss the list of packages you want, and off it goes.

[teh603]

I agree about the dependencies.

USC is nice and easy to look at. But it does not give you the power and freedom and control that Synaptic does. If I had to pick between the two and could only have one--I'd pick Synaptic.Same here to be honest, I'd rather have kpackagekit than software center if I had to choose one or the other. Then again, kpackagekit can already sort packages by category so the two are somewhat blurred.

[johnnybelfast]

I like these layouts. They look user friendly and are pretty. Exactly what Ubuntu needs if it wants to become mainstream. Good looking GUI's are necessary.

[seeker5528]

the thing I really love about Synaptic is how I can install and uninstall multiple applications all at once. I select everything I want and then click Apply. Lovely!

It's a design decision, if you are going to allow installation to start immediately, you have to treat each install separately and queue each install individually.

Some extra time gets taken by multiple individual installs, but I would guess for most people, if you factor in the time taken selecting what to install, having to wait until everything is selected before installations can be started would probably often take more time than treating each selection individually and starting installation immediately while allowing additional stuff to be queued.


I agree about the dependencies.

USC is nice and easy to look at. But it does not give you the power and freedom and control that Synaptic does. If I had to pick between the two and could only have one--I'd pick Synaptic.

But since you *do* have several options of software to deal with packages, and many people don't care about packages, it was decided to create something that allows people to deal with software and not have to worry about packages so much.

Presenting things as individual packages and presenting groups of packages as this software or that software are two significantly different things and require different design approaches.

Later, Seeker

[nonly1n]

Progress is only slowed by process, I don't see anything wrong with a more aesthetically looking software center, 3 years ago i wouldn't bother using it and now I find synaptic obsolete. I prefer getting rid of all the people who find it hard to install applications in linux and pile up a whole bunch who love the complexity of anything.

Has anyone considered Linux's goal is to get mainstream penetration, and that would mean a simpler learning curve than demanded nowadays. I've been using Linux since Slackware 8 and with every passing year i find my windows partition little less useful.

if you don't want the software center don't use it, I only started using it on Natty and I've gotten accustomed to it. Made me wonder why i depended on synaptic so much.

[christopher.wortman]

Ubuntu is not the only distribution out there... Removing USC and installing synaptic is very simple for those of you who dont like it. Remember this is progress and I love where it is going. Now if only some of the FOSS applications would catch on to style like Ubuntu seems to be doing. Keep up the awesome work!