Is Ubuntu Treating Its Users as If They Can’t Be Trusted?
Ubuntu has taken another step that, honestly, leaves me scratching my head. While most distributions try to offer as many convenient GUI tools as possible to help users manage every part of their system, Ubuntu… apparently sees things a bit differently.I say this because Ubuntu 26.04 LTS (scheduled for release on April, 23) will no longer ship the long-standing “Software & Updates” graphical tool by default on fresh desktop installs, following a change proposed in Launchpad as bug 2140527.
The adjustment replaces the software-properties-gtk package in the desktop seed with software-properties-common, effectively removing the visible GUI while keeping the underlying repository management tools in place.
Is Ubuntu Treating Its Users as If They Can’t Be Trusted?
Canonical drops the Software & Updates tool from Ubuntu 26.04 LTS defaults, citing usability and maintenance concerns.Bobby Borisov (Linuxiac)
like this
jhulian sevsix
in reply to cm0002 • • •like this
ammorok likes this.
LiveLM
in reply to cm0002 • • •What really bothers me is removing the current tool before you have a replacement ready. Worst tech trend ever!
RickyRigatoni
in reply to cm0002 • • •u/CaperGrrl79
in reply to RickyRigatoni • • •Does Timeshift work on Ubuntu? It works on Mint, which is based on Ubuntu.
But if this crap keeps up, I might go with LMDE7.
Tony Schmidt
in reply to cm0002 • •falseprophet likes this.
Die4Ever
in reply to cm0002 • • •Mugita Sokio
in reply to cm0002 • • •Someone bought them outright. To be fair about this, what they're doing, at this entity's hands, is treating people like Microsoft and Apple treat their users: like criminals.
Corporations police harder than governments, though.
ulterno
in reply to cm0002 • • •PokerChips
in reply to cm0002 • • •Lvxferre [he/him]
in reply to cm0002 • • •First it was Mir, the alternative to X and Wayland. Then it was Unity (notice the name!), yet another desktop environment. Now it's snaps, as an alternative to flatpak.
Are you noticing the pattern? It's always Canonical trying to force some distro-agnostic tool into the Linux community, so other distros start depending on Canonical. Always doing this through unnecessary fragmentation.
To be clear, fragmentation is not always bad. Sometimes it enables people to appease different target demographics; specially in the context of Unity. However the way Canonical does this stinks "we want control!" from a distance.
With that in mind, look at the part I've emphasised. It shows the actual reason why Canonical is ditching software-properties from the defaults: because it
... Show more...First it was Mir, the alternative to X and Wayland. Then it was Unity (notice the name!), yet another desktop environment. Now it's snaps, as an alternative to flatpak.
Are you noticing the pattern? It's always Canonical trying to force some distro-agnostic tool into the Linux community, so other distros start depending on Canonical. Always doing this through unnecessary fragmentation.
To be clear, fragmentation is not always bad. Sometimes it enables people to appease different target demographics; specially in the context of Unity. However the way Canonical does this stinks "we want control!" from a distance.
With that in mind, look at the part I've emphasised. It shows the actual reason why Canonical is ditching software-properties from the defaults: because it wants to press further for snaps, in detriment of .deb packages.
What follows is basically an excuse. I don't think it's actually removing it because "it's too dangerous" or whatnot. However, if anything "this is an excuse, not the real reason" only adds injury, because it shows 1) that Canonical sees no problem misleading the users on why it does something; and 2) the people working there are so detached, but so detached from the userbase that they don't get why this would rub users the wrong way. (It's basically a "you're trash too stupid to not cause itself harm" dammit.)
Ah, by the way: Canonical was always some sort of Apple wannabe.
ExLisper
in reply to cm0002 • • •Taleya
in reply to ExLisper • • •This is not true in any way shape or form.
User roles and controls are baked into linux and have been since its inception
Also RHEL has been The Corporate Linux for decades