Slashdot Mirror


Synaptic Dropped From Ubuntu 11.10

An anonymous reader links to a story at Techie Buzz according to which (quoting): "When Canonical started developing the Ubuntu Software Center, I knew that a time will come when it will completely replace Synaptic. The Software Center is a noob-friendly replacement for Synaptic where users can discover new applications more easily. Unexpectedly, Canonical has decided that it is time for the Software Center to replace Synaptic as well. So, in the next daily build of Ubuntu 11.10, Synaptic will no longer be installed by default. The Ubuntu Software Center still lacks many important features that are present in Synaptic."

45 of 360 comments (clear)

  1. Install by Jaysyn · · Score: 4, Insightful

    As long as you can install it from the Software Center, I don't see a problem. Did they need the space for something else on the ISO?

    --
    There is a war going on for your mind.
    1. Re:Install by drb226 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Ironic but true. Just like MS preinstalling only IE. As long as you can use it to get Firefox or Chrome or whatever, then no big deal.

    2. Re:Install by leamanc · · Score: 5, Informative

      No, they didn't need the space. It has been Canonical's plan for a while to drop Synaptic and Update Manager (and any other GUI apps that are front ends to the various apt tools) and roll everything into Software Center.

      It's been on their roadmap for a while, and I was surprised that Synaptic made it into 11.04. I am also surprised that Update Manager is hanging around.

      This is all in the interest of average-Joe users who don't need to know the differences between Synaptic and Software Center, or how they overlap with each other, or with Update Manager. Long-time users or power users can go install Synaptic from the repos if they like, or use apt or dpkg at the command line. Me personally, I always update with 'sudo apt-get update' on the command line because I find it faster than Update Manager. But Grandma doesn't need to do that; software installation and updating should be done all in one place for her.

      --
      :q!
    3. Re:Install by Have+Brain+Will+Rent · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'm pretty sure it wasn't a question of demographics.

      Ummm, well, perhaps, but I was responding to someone who said it was a question of demographics... so that's how I framed my response.

      even if you do not, yourself, have a grandma who is technologically ignorant, apathetic, or intolerant (or if you are yourself a grandma who is technologically savvy, depending on what your beef with the GP/GGGP is) you have certainly encountered at least one person who fits the description.

      I've encountered at least one teen who was "Technologically ignorant/apathetic/intolerant" - shall we start substituting "teens" for "grandma"?

      the alternative is for them to keep rephrasing "Technologically ignorant/apathetic/intolerant" in various ways

      Ummmm, why do they have to keep rephrasing the above? "They" don't seem to mind re-using "Grandma/pa" over and over so why not use your phrase over and over?

      that's both awkward linguistically and boring

      And continually repeating ageist comments like "grandma" isn't (boring)? Come now.

      Or you could just be trolling.

      If you had a good argument to make you could make it without accusations/insinuations of trolling. It isn't trolling to point out ageist speech, which is a specific type of bigoted speech, when I see it.

      You do get why bigoted speech is wrong don't you? That, among other things, it encourages false negative stereotypes about a particular group which ultimately leads to discrimination against members of that group to whom the stereotype does not apply?

      And btw the onus is not on me to provide a non-ageist alternative; the onus is on the person wanting to generalize to do so in a manner that does not pander to bigoted and/or stereotyped viewpoints. But here you go, here is a substitute for free: "technologically unsophisticated:" which actually communicates the (presumably) intended meaning without inaccurately stereotyping any group. If that is boring to you that is too bad - your boredom does not an excuse for bigotry make.

      And if you don't get all that then I can only suggest you go find your parents and tell them that they and everyone else old enough to have grandchildren are "Technologically ignorant/apathetic/intolerant".

      --
      The tyrant will always find a pretext for his tyranny - Aesop
    4. Re:Install by Rogerborg · · Score: 2

      Synaptic is only an apt-get away if one really needs it.

      Better, if you can apt-get synaptic, then you don't need synaptic.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    5. Re:Install by vegiVamp · · Score: 2

      Slightly more accurate would be "as long as you can install an alternative and uninstall the preinstalled one". Microsoft claimed for a very long time that IE was an essential part of the operating system and removing it would break the system.

      --
      What a depressingly stupid machine.
  2. Shocking... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 2, Informative

    So. First there is dpkg. Upon dpkg stands APT, for your greater ease and convenience. Upon APT stands synaptic, for your GUI-based package management needs.

    Yeah, I'm just not really surprised that somebody might attempt to replace the easy, graphical, user-friendly tool at the end of this particular chain with one that they believe is easier, more user-friendly, or whatever. The tool being deprecated essentially filled the same niche, and the whole lot rests upon the same fundamental architecture.

    1. Re:Shocking... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 3, Informative

      My understanding is that all three, synaptic, USC, and aptitude, are apt frontends, with aptitude being the only one that(by default, I think it is an option now) uses ncurses rather than GTK.

  3. By default by Superken7 · · Score: 2

    I think its a good decision. The public for which Ubuntu is intended has no use whatsoever for Synaptic. Other users are an apt-get away from it, and I think thats just fine.

    Disclaimer: I never liked synaptic, mainly because for me its interface rendered it totally unuseful because it was hideous and not really well designed, plus it was easier for me to just apt-get.
    I still use apt-get because its faster, but I think anyone can just pick up the software center and use it, unlike synaptic which I think is very confusing for noobs or even newcomers which are familiar with apt tools.

    1. Re:By default by Chris+Burke · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Disclaimer: I never liked synaptic, mainly because for me its interface rendered it totally unuseful because it was hideous and not really well designed, plus it was easier for me to just apt-get.
      I still use apt-get because its faster, but I think anyone can just pick up the software center and use it, unlike synaptic which I think is very confusing for noobs or even newcomers which are familiar with apt tools.

      Right. I like synaptic for finding packages when I don't know their names because I find it easier to browse and conduct iterative searches than apt-cache search in a terminal. I don't see why it should be confusing for anyone familiar with the ins and outs of apt, but it's still just a basic gui wrapper around those tools.

      It is not something that Joe Non-Linux-Lover can just sit down and use. I know; I have a friend who is a complete computer novice and is using Ubuntu. He manages just fine, but he doesn't go anywhere near Synaptic. Update Manager is the only way he, you know, manages updates. But when he needs something new on his machine, I have to walk him through step-by-step on using Synaptic over the phone.

      Hopefully Software Center will be something he can actually use on his own.

      Synaptic isn't it. Despite being, from my perspective, the "noob" way of interfacing with apt. I sometimes like doing things the 'noob' way, but hey, I'll still be able to!

      I can't think of a reason to complain. I mean, if I can accept that Emacs doesn't come with a default install (which is much more important to me than a gui apt front-end), then I can handle this. I can't understand the whining. :P

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    2. Re:By default by turing_m · · Score: 2

      First they came for synaptic,
      and I didn't speak out because I did not use synaptic.

      Then they came for apt-get,
      and I didn't speak out because I did not use apt-get.

      Then they came for bash,
      and I didn't speak out because I did not use bash.

      Then they came for me,
      and I paid them off through the convenient and intuitive Ubuntu Software Center.

      --
      If I have seen further it is by stealing the Intellectual Property of giants.
    3. Re:By default by mug+funky · · Score: 2

      first they came for gnome, but i didn't speak up, because i used 10.10 netbook remix

      then they came for openoffice, but i didn't speak up, because gedit was enough for me

      then they came for synaptic, but i didn't speak up, because i used apt-get

      then they came for me, and there were no package managers left to... wait, what?

    4. Re:By default by Have+Brain+Will+Rent · · Score: 2

      Well synaptic will show me a brief description of each package, will search based on text I supply - so if I don't remember the exact name of something, or if I'm just curious about what is out there, it will supply a list of possibilities, it will detail what files are installed etc. etc. And it does all this in a nice presentation format.

      Does apt-get do that?

      And most of all, once again I now have to spend yet more of my time figuring out Canonical's latest unnecessary change to something - instead of spending the time on what I'm really supposed to be doing...

      --
      The tyrant will always find a pretext for his tyranny - Aesop
  4. Not a big deal by Annirak · · Score: 4, Informative

    If you want it, you've got it.

    $ sudo apt-get install synaptic

    Done.

  5. apt-get and aptitude users won't by G3ckoG33k · · Score: 2

    apt-get and aptitude users won't as they don't know how to use synaptic; at least I don't.

  6. Re:No big deal by MightyMartian · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Or, alternatively, you can just install Debian. I've pretty much abandoned Ubuntu at this point.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  7. Re:Goodbye Ubuntu by Threni · · Score: 2

    Dude, nobody cares what OS you use. If configuring your OS is so painful that you want to go and use a different OS (which either doesn't let you configure it as easily, or which comes with a slightly different selection of applications, then I think you should follow your dream.

  8. Re:Again by h4rr4r · · Score: 4, Funny

    Fascist?
    So you think comparing a change default GUI for package management is comparable to a political ideology that believes in the organic state, the merger of corporate power and law and in the philosophy of sacrificing any and all subjects for the glory of the state?

  9. So, install it manually? by gweihir · · Score: 2

    Honestly, what is installed by default is the noob-selection, so a noob-grade packet manager is perfectly adequate. As long as you can "apt-get install" the other packet managers, where is the problem?

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    1. Re:So, install it manually? by X10 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Didn't Heinrich Heine say something like "where they make important features optional, tomorrow they'll remove them altogether" ?

      --
      no, I don't have a sig
  10. As long as Apt is left alone by Bloodwine77 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Honestly I don't use either Synaptic or the Software Center. I do it all on the command-line using apt-cache and apt-get.

    So far I can work around all of Canonical's crazy decisions. I forced myself to quit using Gnome 2.32 (aka Ubuntu Classic) and use Xfce instead to prepare for 11.10. I have to say that I have gotten used to Xfce and really like it.

    I really don't feel like migrating my home boxes from Ubuntu unless I absolutely have to do so. The day Ubuntu prevents me from working around their craziness is the day I finally jump ship.

  11. Does Ubuntu Ever Stop Changing? by BJ_Covert_Action · · Score: 2

    I started using Ubuntu about 3 years ago with 8.04. At one point, I upgraded to 9.04. Now I am living comfortable on 10.04. Across those three years and three editions I have heard Ubuntu talk about changing it's primary display configuration engine (X/Xorg to Wayland), it's default browser (Firefox to Chrome), its network managment utility (I'll admit, this one needed fixing), and a host of other tweaks. Now Ubuntu wants to ditch Synaptic for the Ubuntu Software Center.

    I get that software moves fast, and buggy software needs to be fixed and replaced with less-buggy software. But wholesale gutting of some of the fundamental portions of an OS (as seen from the user side) every 6 months to a year is a little extreme. What was wrong with Synaptic that it needs replacing? I like it. It seems pretty sraightforward and functional.I don't mean to gripe, but does Canonical really need to replace utilities that its users have gotten used to when the original utilities worked equally well (Pidjin to Empathy? etc.).

    Yeah, yeah, I can just install all of the old legacy sofware that I like, but it just seems so odd to uproot basic default utilities so regularly.

    1. Re:Does Ubuntu Ever Stop Changing? by Bloodwine77 · · Score: 2

      Perhaps Mark Shuttleworth has ADHD

  12. The Road Ubuntu is on... by JustNiz · · Score: 2

    The excuse given for dropping Synaptic is to make space on the CD, but I remember reading somewhere fairly trustworthy that 11.04 would be the last release as a CD ISO, and the next release (11.10) would be a DVD iso.

    Continuing to require Ubuntu to only be released as a CD-sized ISO is a backward step IMHO. At least also provide a DVD image. They've already pushed the size limit of the ISO so much that you can't even use conventional 650mb CDRs or even 80 minute CD/RWs, you specifically need an 80-minute CDR.

    These days CDR has been practically obsoleted by DVD+/-R(W) and writeable blu-ray. I wish Ubuntu would make the jump. I personally find it very inconvenient to have to keep a stock of 80 minute blank CDRs around just for ubuntu releases. It feels as bad as having to keep floppy disks around. Everything else I do I use blank DVDs or blu-rays for.

    It seems to me a more likely reason for dropping Synaptic is that the marketing minds behind Ubuntu are gradually eliminating support for those pesky power users. If true this is the same massively broken thinking that makes Windows such a pain in the ass to use for anyone trying to do anything remotely technical. I mean what the F*** are they thinking with that horribly inefficient unity interface?

    Having the power to efficiently and directly do what I need to with as few keystrokes/clicks as possible, and avoiding being forced to use a series of dumbed-down and limited tools that automatically assume you're ignorant and stupid is why I chose to use Linux over Windows in the first place. Unfortunately the road Ubuntu is on seems to be remarkably similar to Microsoft in assuming users can't possibly know enough to be trusted with a powerful tool.

    Any more dumbing down of Ubuntu and I for one will be dropping it.

    1. Re:The Road Ubuntu is on... by DemonGenius · · Score: 2

      This "road" Ubuntu is on is getting too bumpy for me too. Right now I find myself stuck on 10.10 and not wanting to go anywhere. Maverick is a very solid release compared to the others and loathe having to "upgrade" to some crappy interface that Ubuntu forces on me by default. One of my biggest gripes of 11.04 is that they steal the use of the super (Windows home) key for the Unity main menu, making my Super+Space combo useless for Gnome Do and making keyboard shortcuts useless for other applications that use the super key. Removing Synaptic is the last straw, even if I can simply apt it back. When Canonical halts support for 10.10, I'll probably give Fedora or Linux Mint a go.

      Fortunately, the good thing about roads is that they can be forked.

    2. Re:The Road Ubuntu is on... by DragonWriter · · Score: 3, Informative

      Continuing to require Ubuntu to only be released as a CD-sized ISO is a backward step IMHO. At least also provide a DVD image.

      Ubuntu provides a number of alternative images besides the normal desktop install CD image, including a DVD image, and has for several years.

      It seems to me a more likely reason for dropping Synaptic is that the marketing minds behind Ubuntu are gradually eliminating support for those pesky power users.

      Synaptic has been replaced by the Ubuntu Software Center as the primary package management UI for Ubuntu for a while; the decision not to include it on the CD is a change with little actual effect, especially on power users, who can presumably figure out how to install something that is in the repositories but not on the CD. If they really don't like USC, they can do it through the command line, since the command line tools aren't being taken out of the CD, or even the base install.

      Any more dumbing down of Ubuntu and I for one will be dropping it.

      Ubuntu is, overtly, intended to be, first and foremost, Linux for casual mass-market users, and the default install (and the packages available on the default install media) reflect that. Now, Ubuntu continues to support other users with packages available in the repositories and on alternate install media (and in alternate distributions in the Ubuntu family; e.g., Ubuntu Server is, naturally, not intended for casual mass-market users), but complaining that the default Ubuntu install and default install media are exactly what Ubuntu markets itself as is, well, somewhat pointless.

    3. Re:The Road Ubuntu is on... by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 2

      If you're used to Ubuntu but want to switch, there's no reason not to go to Debian. You'll get roughly the same package versions from testing, and all your apt skills remain intact. And, contrary to popular opinion, you don't need to muck around with stuff from command line in Debian if you don't want to, with a few minor exceptions - not at all like Gentoo or Arch.

  13. Re:Again by MightyMartian · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Are these the opening lines to an unreleased Monty Python skit?

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  14. Re:No big deal by npsimons · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Or, alternatively, you can just install Debian. I've pretty much abandoned Ubuntu at this point.

    Seconded. I only ran Ubuntu because it's what came with my system76 laptop; after it started having issues and crashing randomly(!), I backed up my files, wiped it and installed a fresh version of Debian (also wanted to do that from the start since Ubuntu didn't have encrypted drives out of the box). Surprise! My laptop no longer randomly crashes or locks up. I'm guessing it was the proprietary, binary only drivers, but what's weird is that I'm sure I'm running at least one binary blob under Debian that is probably identical to Ubuntu (the wireless driver). Oh well; if you Ubuntu users like teh shiny, that's fine by me. As long as I get to play with my 8 DVDs of science/engineering/sw dev packages, I'll be happy :)

  15. Re:Again by h4rr4r · · Score: 2

    No one expects Gentoo users? The Linux Ricers!

  16. Canonical needs to be more careful by frisket · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I thought Unity sucked the first time I saw it. It still has defects, but having used it for a couple of months, it works, and it's not too bad.

    Synaptic as always worked fine, and doesn't need replacing. But if Canonical is changing it for something else, they need to make sure they don't lose functionality, otherwise they'll lose their best marketing tool — the people who like Ubuntu and proselytise it well.

    Unfortunately, Canonical is going the way of so many companies, becoming arrogant and thinking they know best, regardless. They need to develop some humility.

  17. Get off my lawn! by CjKing2k · · Score: 2

    Another "x dropped from Ubuntu" post, another mass ragequit from the hive mind.

    Ten years ago, nobody complained about the default installation profile of Linux distributions. If you were geeky enough to use Linux, then you knew how to use package managers and could maybe even configure and make something from source. Now everyone wants their preferred DE and pre-selected apps handed to them on a platter, as if they reinstalled their OS every fucking week. If the default package list is a deal breaker for you when choosing a distribution, then you need to reevaluate why you are using Linux to begin with. And no, you probably won't find yourself welcome in the Gentoo/LFS communities either because they dropped this grievance long ago.

  18. Re:Trust me. by Grishnakh · · Score: 2

    And sooner or later, someone is going to realize that they can fork Ubuntu, remove Unity, remove Software Center and I'll flock it it then.

    Ever heard of Mint? It's been out for a while now.

  19. Re:Goodbye Ubuntu by Grishnakh · · Score: 2

    Dude, nobody cares what OS you use.

    Actually, they do. This is a Linux article, and it's reasonable to assume that many Linux users will be reading it. If you're not a Linux user, you might not care, just like you might not care what color some enthusiast has painted his [car model]. However, on a web forum dedicated to [car model], you'll find lots of threads of people talking about different paint colors, wheels, modifications, etc. etc., and when someone repaints their car [car model], they do indeed get a lot of other [car model] owners and enthusiasts commenting on his choice of color, especially if it's a non-factory or custom color. Some comments may be highly positive, others may be negative, but either way, those people definitely care enough to spend their time browsing the [car model] forum and chitchatting with owners of the same car and commenting on changes they've made to them and other minutia related to [car model] that that select group finds interesting but outsiders would find boring.

    It's the same way here. If you don't like it, I invite you to close your browser window and go back to the Slashdot main page and find an article you have more interest in. Maybe the article about the Windows 8 programming interface will be more to your liking, or perhaps some Apple-related article.

  20. Re:Trust me. by orngjce223 · · Score: 2

    A choice of Google keywords: Xubuntu, Kubuntu, Linux Mint.

    Knock yourself out. Or at least rush at the Mint guys and make sure they don't get rid of synaptic as well.

    --
    Note: I was 13 when I wrote most of this. Take with several grains of salt.
  21. Re:Goodbye Ubuntu by mug+funky · · Score: 2

    i never used synaptic. i used apt-get and software centre when i was lazy or browsing for shit.

    if you need anything more advanced than software centre, you really should be using aptitude.

  22. Welcome to mass market appeal by Annirak · · Score: 2

    Why should we care if users get as far as $ sudo apt-get? The point is that they're on the platform. You can't ask for both mass-market acceptance and exposed complexity. If you keep the exposed complexity, the mass market won't want it. At least Shuttleworth seems to get this. I know that everyone's down on Ubuntu lately for "changing things" but, honestly, if they've done due diligence and run these changes past some focus groups full of people who haven't used Linux before, they're probably going to get more adoption out of the changes.

    If the UI is simpler, it's still *possible* to get the old UI back, and they get more adoption out of it, that's awesome. It means more market penetration for Linux.

    Users who want more power will search the web and find tutorials. The tutorials will tell them about other software or the command line, and they'll either retain and explore, or they'll give up. Either way, many of these users are the ones who wouldn't have tried Linux before Ubuntu and, as Ubuntu keeps getting simpler to use, they're the ones who will recommend Ubuntu to all the people that we haven't reached.

    I'm fine with Ubuntu being "dumbed down" as long as I can smarten it up from the command line.

    P.S. Why would you bother to sudo from a root shell? (# is root, $ is user)

  23. Re:Goodbye Ubuntu by timnbron · · Score: 2

    Luxury! When I were a lad, we had to hand code the packages in byte by byte, and t'Gaffer would delete the lot if we got a byte wrong!

    --
    There are some who call me ... Tim.
  24. Re:Goodbye Ubuntu by Plombo · · Score: 2

    The problem is that Canonical is once again trying to pass off bulky and unfinished crap (Ubuntu Software Center) as a replacement for something stable, full-featured, and useful (Synaptic). The same thing happened with Unity, hence the comparison. After another release or two of Ubuntu, I'll be very surprised if they keep it in the Canonical-supported "main" repository instead of pushing it to universe.

  25. Re:Goodbye Ubuntu by Lord+Kano · · Score: 2

    I could stand Unity, but this is too much.

    Another step closer to every OS being Cell-Phoned.

    LK

    --
    "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
  26. Re:Goodbye Ubuntu by CronoCloud · · Score: 2

    Obligatory XKCD reference. Hand coding? we had to use butterflies....theyd flap their wings to cause atmospheric distrubances to focus cosmic rays on the single bit at a time on the platter we wanted to flip.

    http://xkcd.com/378/

  27. Your core is not as hard as you think by tpstigers · · Score: 2
    Ubuntu has been making a spirited attempt at becoming the distro for the Linux newbie. And they have been largely successful at it, mainly because of decisions like this one. New-comers and "average Joes" shouldn't have to learn how to use Synaptic (which, frankly, has never been much fun to use). Similarly, there's a good reason for including a launcher out of the box. It doesn't surprise me in the least when Canonical makes decisions that create an Ubuntu that is closer to an OS my Mom could use (in fact, they may have arrived there already).

    What does surprise me is the vitriol that's being spewed about it here. If you feel a compelling need to think of yourself as some sort of hardcore Linux geek, just get yourself another distro. As a hardcore Linux geek, you should know they're out there (you might even know where to get them). Ubuntu is not intended for the hardcore user (it's hardly a bare-bones distro) - quite the opposite, in fact.

    And I have to admit I'm confused by all the Linux wizards here who are so hardcore they feel they must have Synaptic, but are simultaneously outraged by the fact that they have to type 'sudo apt-get install' into a terminal in order to get it.

  28. Guys, chill out... by balaband · · Score: 2

    There is a masterplan at work here.

    The casual and noob users will be offered something really simple, with everything set up by default - so they can get accustomed to new platform. This is a ticket in. When you get more experienced, than you can start tweaking it or move to another distro.

    Dumb it down even more. Remove anything than 3-year-old can't use. 2 apps for music playback? One to many. Video player? Works with any kind of format that you can throw at it. If not, do a next->next->finish upgrade. More games by default. Simplify, simplify, simplify. Rinse. Repeat.

    Goal? Make it more easy than Mac to use. SCSB (Start Computer, Shutdown Brain) users are a market to aim for

    1. Re:Guys, chill out... by MonsterTrimble · · Score: 2

      Simplify, simplify, simplify. Rinse. Repeat.

      That's the mantra of every Engineer, isn't it? "A designer knows he has achieved perfection not when there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away." - Antoine de Saint-Exupry

      --
      I call it 'The Aristocrats'
  29. Re:No big deal by crhylove · · Score: 2

    Or Linux Mint. Why is nobody in these threads suggesting Linux Mint? It is the Number 3 OS in the world by some metrics now, even over Ubuntu. It's easy to use, clean, fast, stable, reliable, and the community is AWESOME.

    "Mint and Forget" is what myself and some of my IT colleagues are saying every day now.

    --
    I hold very few opinions. I hold information based on observation and fact. If you wish to disagree, please use facts.