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."

Comments

Install

[Jaysyn]

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?

Re:Install

[drb226]

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.

Re:Install

[leamanc]

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.

Re:Install

[Have Brain Will Rent]

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".

Not a big deal

[Annirak]

If you want it, you've got it.

$ sudo apt-get install synaptic

Done.

Re:No big deal

[MightyMartian]

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

Re:Again

[h4rr4r]

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?

As long as Apt is left alone

[Bloodwine77]

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.

Re:Shocking...

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

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.

Re:Again

[MightyMartian]

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

Re:So, install it manually?

[X10]

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

Re:By default

[Chris Burke]

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

Canonical needs to be more careful

[frisket]

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.

Re:The Road Ubuntu is on...

[DragonWriter]

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.