Meerkat Software Centre UI continues to evolve adding new look, retweeting apps

By Joey Sneddon, Published June 29, 2010

The Ubuntu Software Centre developments for Ubuntu 10.10 are continuing and those users currently testing out Maverick will likely have spotted a more dramatic visual over-haul of the Software Centre of late: –

To break the design down a bit – the layout of ‘Departments’ is excellent and more prominent in this iteration. The ‘featured applications’ section is still animated but looks much better in its new position. As for the ‘What’s new’ section – count me sold! I cannot wait to see applications – ‘new’ applications introduced post-release as we discussed some weeks back – start to populate that. (I also really love that their running with the ‘store’ metaphor)

Another feature now working, which has been present for a wee while, is the ability to 'tweet' your favourite applications, complete with apr:url for one-click install via Gwibber directly from the software centre itself.

Thanks to Cullen

Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.

David Ashford
It did originally have store in the title but it was changed to centre/center based on user opposition to using the term store. I prefer using centre especially as it seems to be more in line with the idea of eventually acting as a replacement to synaptic.

Pamarca
And the fact that it should eventually include the functions of synaptic is the same reason why software was favored against app.

http://omgubuntu.co.uk/ d0od
I do understand the reasoning’s behind the change – and in the context of synaptic, package management etc ‘software centre’ certainly is apt (no pun intended) but, having introduced Ubuntu to various relatives (who can’t tell an OS from a browser) they are never entirely sure of what the software centre is until they open it. (Or ask how they install applications and I have to point it out.)

zekopeko
The reason for change were whiny FOSS users that think charging money for software is evil.

Anonymous
Evil or not, the center does *not* sell software. No need to get inflamed over this.
zekopeko
It’s not selling software now but it was always planned to do so. Having it named as such from the start makes sense. Or do you suggest that when they start selling software they rename the application, again?
tigerblue
Stop that.
This is not your project to co-opt. FOSS users and developers have very good reason to be skeptical about attempts to commercialize a movement that they have poured countless amounts of energy and time into.
Selling software is one thing. Changing the nature of the project itself is another. Which direction these changes will take us has yet to be determined.
tigerblue
Stop that.
This is not your project to co-opt. FOSS users and developers have very good reason to be skeptical about attempts to commercialize a movement that they have poured countless amounts of energy and time into.
Selling software is one thing. Changing the nature of the project itself is another. Which direction these changes will take us has yet to be determined.

http://cldx.blogspot.com/ Joern Konopka
To me this sounds like another case of unneccesary over-analysis, of course it’s good to think about a name wisely, but d0od pointed it out perfectly, non-techies are still estranged by the name, it still sounds like something along the lines of “Sytem Settings” or “System Administration”. We might blame Apple for making the word “App” so extremely popular and impregnated amongst the everyday User, but are they so wrong? Its catchy, it’s attractive, let’s use it! It implies you’re gonna be able to buy Apps (btw nobody ever complained about the Apple AppStore giving out free Apps even though its a STORE! get it?) , which will be true in the future.I know, there seem to be people disliking the Name for being not descriptive enough, but do we really need to be as descriptive as Scientists for really obvious functionality? Or lets turn that one around, don’ t we want functionality that should be obvious without thinking? I can’t imagine a single person saying “Now what the hell is an App Store supposed to be?”. I could imagine a certain amount of people complaining about the name though, but admit it guys, people going those lengths over a name are most likely the ones that are gonna be looking for devel packages in Synaptic or just use apt right away (Like us ;) ).This may sound like a little bit too much of a universal plea for something simple as a name, but take it as something you can reflect on every Ubuntu-Topic these days. We need to get ourselves out of the equation for a basic UI and put our Brothers, Sisters, Moms and Dads into it to make Ubuntu shine. If we really are as smart as we always like to pretend we are, we should realize that WE are not the Usual Audience. They are.
EDIT. Sorry for talking straight out of my head for so long, i mostly can’t help it.

Anonymous
“It implies you’re gonna be able to buy Apps…which will be true in the future.”
Why would you believe this?
“(btw nobody ever complained about the Apple AppStore giving out free Apps even though its a STORE! get it?)”
That’s because it sells the vast majority of apps.
Anonymous
For me, the word “App” might be the ugliest word in todays english. I see it as just a marketing trick for the Apple crowd, and it makes me a bit sad that Canonical wants to do as Apple dictates. Ubuntu is independent!
zekopeko
Do you have some information that the rest of us don’t? There was no mention of changing the USC’s name. D0od only expressed his opinion.
Anonymous
Whops, you’re right. I’m sorry. I don’t know what was going on there.
Anonymous
Whops, you’re right. I’m sorry. I don’t know what was going on there.
zekopeko
Do you have some information that the rest of us don’t? There was no mention of changing the USC’s name. D0od only expressed his opinion.

Anonymous
I agree, “store” makes it sound like there is money involved.

zekopeko
That’s the point…
http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/7GXJ4CL5A6A5YPPUO47UQXGP5Y Johan
That is exactly the point. The ability to buy applications is planned.

daas88
but it serves as an easy way to get free and open source software, and the word “store” makes it sound like it’s all about commercial software…

http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/7GXJ4CL5A6A5YPPUO47UQXGP5Y Johan
That is exactly the point. The ability to buy applications is planned.

Bob
IIRC the main reason for the opposition was that it sounded like it was selling stuff, which annoyed the “anti-commercial” people. However, now it will be selling software, so that’s no longer a problem.

zekopeko
It was always meant to sell software alongside the regular repos.

Anonymous
Proof or it didn’t happen?

zekopeko
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SoftwareCenter#October%…
I suggest you look at the first revisions since a lot was added and removed from that specification during the 18 months. It was always meant to sell software.

Pamarca
Nice! this seems to fix a bug I submitted to launchpad a while ago
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/software-center/+bug/435431
The previous design had hard-coded colors which didn’t fare well with any theme. Specially, it was an issue for people requiring a high contrast theme.
http://twitter.com/harbhag HARBHAG SINGH SOHAL
This looks so cool
http://harbhag.wordpress.com

http://www.manishsinha.net Manish Sinha
Blog Spam!!! Blog Spam!!

http://twitter.com/harbhag HARBHAG SINGH SOHAL
STFU dumb ass ,

daas88
you are not going to get a lot of visits with that attitude Â¬Â¬

http://twitter.com/harbhag HARBHAG SINGH SOHAL
@tylerbrainerd
Somewhere I read that leaving behind link of your blog where ever you comment can get you some visits . But i think i got it wrong way . I will keep it in mind next time . Thanks for clarifying it for me .
@dass88
i know thats rude but I just hate the way that kiddo was shouting . Thats pathetic .
@all
pls excuse my bad English . I am still learning .
http://www.manishsinha.net Manish Sinha
And we all hate blog spam. And we all hate how you use STFU. STFU applies for you. We all hate when a spammer uses the word “dumbass”. It again applies for you.I know I am a bit rude, but I do need to say. Looking, at your blog articles, you look a kiddo in front of me. I know that’s boasting, but I can’t help when you brought up the word “kiddo”
You were pathetic in getting onvolved in blog spam and using “STFU” and “dumbass”. Aren’t you ashamed in getting involved in name-calling?
http://twitter.com/harbhag HARBHAG SINGH SOHAL
First of all “I am not a spammer” . You need look at my reply for moderator . I myself hate spammers ( and people like you ) . And I am a regular reader of this blog and I have recommended this blog to the members of my LUG as we primarily use Ubuntu and this blog have helped us a lot . And I dont think I would like to spam a blog that I regularly read . I used word “kiddo” for the way you was shouting and not for your blogging skills and that makes you actually “kiddo” for not understanding such a simple thing and I am just a beginner in the field of blogging (just started last year) . Dude if you still cant understand what I am saying then you really a DUMBASS .
http://www.manishsinha.net Manish Sinha
“”I used word “kiddo” for the way you was shouting and not for your blogging skills and that makes you actually “kiddo” for not understanding such a simple thing “”
I do understand. You might not be a spammer, but the way you were commenting was the way spammers do. No one is born with a tag of spammer, it is the acts which makes one.
I can understand what you are saying, but you should also learn the basics of commenting on any blog which distinguishes you from a spammer, if you don’t then you are a DUMBASS
http://twitter.com/harbhag HARBHAG SINGH SOHAL
“I can understand what you are saying, but you should also learn the basics of commenting on any blog which distinguishes you from a spammer, if you don’t then you are a DUMBASS ”
Yes I got the difference very clearly after the moderator’s post .
Seriously this discussion is going nowhere and we need to stop .
PEACE
http://www.manishsinha.net Manish Sinha
Agree. PEACE PEACE PEACE.
Done!

Anonymous
er, no seriously. that’s blog spam. please don’t do that here, or we’ll just delete your comments with unrelated links and then just ban you. if you have something that adds to the conversation, then explain why then put the link. if you don’t, we’re assuming it’s just spam.

http://twitter.com/harbhag HARBHAG SINGH SOHAL
STFU dumb ass ,

Anonymous
That definitely seems more user-friendly for novices than the current software centre. I don’t agree with changing the name to “app store”, that makes it sound like a phone app store (besides, software is software).
However, I’ll continue using apt-get.
zerwas
If you want to try the trial, simply use this link: http://www.lightcrafts.com/SWdownloads/LightZone-latest.tar.gz
No need to provide name and mail address. :)
Anonymous
d0ods posts always amuse me,
he’s a linux savvy guy with a avg. joe mind (err .. mentality / pov ^^)

Anonymous
That is why this blog is so popular.
and his name his Joe(y) lol

Anonymous
“Apps = cool, purposeful applications
Store = Where I go to get stuff.”
This sort of “I’m only a consumer and a store is the only place to get anything” mindset is part of what drove me to Linux in the first place. I’ll be sad to see Ubuntu co-opt Apple’s view of the end user as simply a potential customer who’s only interested in consuming things.
http://www.manishsinha.net Manish Sinha
I think the name should actually have Store, as people should be able to sell their apps too. Selling is never bad. FOSS never says that software cannot be sold.
Screw those whiny retarded FOSS fanatics who always think they are correct and the whole world is acting silly.

Anonymous
I hope you realize there is no mechanism in place for selling software via ppas, etc.
Oh, and also “FOSS” is actually “Free Open-Source Software” (emphasis on “free” and “open source” [how can you sell software yet keep it truly open source?]) So perhaps you should pick your acronyms more carefully.

http://www.manishsinha.net Manish Sinha
“I hope you realize there is no mechanism in place for selling software via ppas, etc.”
And software evolves. Looking at your comment, it looks like you want the technology to stagnate. The devs are more intelligent than you and me can think. They will make out the way if they want to. You just need to relax. Let them handle the technical parts
“emphasis on “free” and “open source” [how can you sell software yet keep it truly open source?”
You need to know the meaning of Free. Free means libre and not gratis. You can still sell the software while keeping it free. It is upto you how you do that, but the license doesn’t prohibit it. Just because you think you cannot sell, doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be allowed.
“So perhaps you should pick your acronyms more carefully. ”
I know what am speaking and I picked the acronyms properly. You try to understand the acronyms properly.

Anonymous
“And software evolves. Looking at your comment, it looks like you want the technology to stagnate. The devs are more intelligent than you and me can think. They will make out the way if they want to. You just need to relax. Let them handle the technical parts”
A model of objectivity, this is. Stagnation is not the status quo – stagnation is going down the wrong path.
“You need to know the meaning of Free. Free means libre and not gratis. You can still sell the software while keeping it free.”
Yet, you cannot sell it and keep it open source (I hope you will not try to explain to me what “open source” means?)
“It is upto you how you do that, but the license doesn’t prohibit it.”
Depends which license you are talking about.
“Just because you think you cannot sell, doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be allowed.”
Just because you think you can sell, doesn’t mean it should be allowed.

zekopeko
>â€œFree softwareâ€ does not mean â€œnoncommercial.â€ A free program must be available for commercial use, commercial development, and commercial distribution. Commercial development of free software is no longer unusual; such free commercial software is very important. You may have paid money to get copies of free software, or you may have obtained copies at no charge. But regardless of how you got your copies, you always have the freedom to copy and change the software, even to sell copies.
This is straight from the FSF: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
So yes you can sell FOSS. I suggest you read up before commenting on such widely know things in the FOSS world.
Anonymous
It is easily argued that software that requires you to pay for viewing the source code is no longer open source – “open” implies that anyone may access the source code if they so desire.
In short, there is such a thing as free closed source software, and fee closed source software, but not (I don’t think) fee open source software (it is no longer truly “open”).
http://www.martinsmucker.com Michael Martin-Smucker
Indeed, if you have to pay money to obtain the source code, then the source is not open. That’s not what people are saying here, though. There are plenty of examples of software that are available commercially, but also have open source code. Some of the games from the Humble Indie Bundle recently opened up their source code, but the games are still being sold because the official game artwork is not free (libre or gratis). It’s very possible for FOSS software to not be “gratis” software.
http://www.manishsinha.net Manish Sinha
“Yet, you cannot sell it and keep it open source”
Why not? Even though it might not look feasible, but that doesn’t mean it should not be allowed.
“Depends which license you are talking about.”
Most licenses I know allow commercial use. Most license allow selling software. Charging for it. Name a license which says, you are not allowed to sell a software.
“Just because you think you can sell, doesn’t mean it should be allowed. ”
You opinion limits what an individual developer can do. You are narrowing down their scope. My take will increase their freedom.
Your opinion says – “Don’t do that”
My opinion – “You are allowed to do that. Do it if you like. Ignore if you don’t”
Anonymous
“Why not? Even though it might not look feasible, but that doesn’t mean it should not be allowed.”
By “cannot”, I meant “this is not practical”.
“Most licenses I know allow commercial use. Most license allow selling software. Charging for it. Name a license which says, you are not allowed to sell a software.”
CC-NC license (and all CC NC licenses).
“You opinion limits what an individual developer can do. You are narrowing down their scope. My take will increase their freedom.
Your opinion says – “Don’t do that”
My opinion – “You are allowed to do that. Do it if you like. Ignore if you don’t”"
So basically any limiting opinion is a bad opinion?
Anonymous
CC-NC is not for Software.
Anonymous
It’s for whatever you want.
http://www.martinsmucker.com Michael Martin-Smucker
No, from the Creative Commons FAQ[1], “Creative Commons licenses should not be used for software.”Also, the FSF doesn’t recognize CC-NC as a truly open source license specifically because it doesn’t allow for commercial redistribution.[2] By nature, a truly open source piece of software should allow users to do whatever they want with the source code, including commercial use, like selling the software.[1] http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Frequently_Aske…[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creative_Commons#T…
Anonymous
You can still use it for whatever – it might not be a good idea, but you can (and the challenge was to find a license that prevented selling).
http://www.martinsmucker.com Michael Martin-Smucker
Okay, so you succeeded at that challenge, but your original point was “you cannot sell [software] and keep it open source.” I don’t see how finding a non-software license that isn’t compatible with open source licenses does anything to prove that point.So far you’ve been shown that the original specification for the Software Center planned to include commercial (“paid for”) software, the option to sell FOSS is a protected right of free software according to the FSF, and there are actual examples of software that is simultaneously open source and commercial. Are there any other topics that you’d like to argue about with the masses? :)
Anonymous
“and there are actual examples of software that is simultaneously open source and commercial.”
Oh really? And what software would this be?
Anonymous
“and there are actual examples of software that is simultaneously open source and commercial.”
Oh really? And what software would this be?
http://www.martinsmucker.com Michael Martin-Smucker
See my response to you a couple posts down. There are quite a few games that have open source code, but the games are sold commercially because the artwork isn’t free. This is a great strategy for (game) developers who want to support open source ideals, but also hope to make some money for their creations.
By now, I guess I’m confused about what point you’re trying to make… It sort of seems like you’re saying “prove it” every time some makes a statement just because you feel like being argumentative.
http://twitter.com/kmetamorphosis Bertel King
Can’t Red Hat Enterprise Linux and SUSE Enterprise Linux also be considered examples of open source software that are sold commercially? You pay for a license to use them for longer than thirty days (or at least this is the case for Red Hat, I am less familiar with how Novell does things).
http://www.martinsmucker.com Michael Martin-Smucker
See my response to you a couple posts down. There are quite a few games that have open source code, but the games are sold commercially because the artwork isn’t free. This is a great strategy for (game) developers who want to support open source ideals, but also hope to make some money for their creations.
By now, I guess I’m confused about what point you’re trying to make… It sort of seems like you’re saying “prove it” every time some makes a statement just because you feel like being argumentative.
http://www.manishsinha.net Manish Sinha
“” So basically any limiting opinion is a bad opinion? “”
Yes. You got my point. You have no right to tell the developers whether they want to sell their software ot give away for free of charge. So yes, limiting opinion is bad opinion,
http://www.manishsinha.net Manish Sinha
“” So basically any limiting opinion is a bad opinion? “”
Yes. You got my point. You have no right to tell the developers whether they want to sell their software ot give away for free of charge. So yes, limiting opinion is bad opinion,
http://www.manishsinha.net Manish Sinha
“” So basically any limiting opinion is a bad opinion? “”
Yes. You got my point. You have no right to tell the developers whether they want to sell their software ot give away for free of charge. So yes, limiting opinion is bad opinion,

http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/7GXJ4CL5A6A5YPPUO47UQXGP5Y Johan
You could charge for a packaged binary and still stay in the limits of the GPL. Users could still compile it themselves if they wanted to.
http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/7GXJ4CL5A6A5YPPUO47UQXGP5Y Johan
You could charge for a packaged binary and still stay in the limits of the GPL. Users could still compile it themselves if they wanted to.

Anonymous
My point is, that’s not a viable business model.
Anonymous
My point is, that’s not a viable business model.

http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/C6S22ANL35LHAH27EX43XFQKTQ Klau3
I like it.
Two little things could be improved:
- The Button sliding could be a tick faster when clicking on e.g. ‘Accessories’.
- When mouse over a category the button could be “stronger colored” and I see no reason why there should be a little arrow (the arrow is to far from the title and kills the “clear harmony” of the software center ^^).
Simon
I liked the previous looks better, but as it is under massive development at the moment, I’m sure it will change until the Maverick release.
As for the name – Software Centre is unique and clear enough, users will get it, they are not stupid.
https://launchpad.net/~alex-nebtown Alexander
I disagree about calling it the App Store, because it suggests the software isn’t free/open source. Application Centre or something would be nice in my opinion.

Ssj6akshat1234
Because there will be Commercial apps to buy(Proprietary or Open Source) in future maybe Maverick+1

Anonymous
oops wrong place
Anonymous
Why is comment appearing on top when replying to someone?DISQUS bug?
http://erigami.myopenid.com/ erigami
It’d be nice if there was some description of the featured/new apps. How will I know if I want to install a new app if I just see its name/icon?
http://erigami.myopenid.com/ erigami
It’d be nice if there was some description of the featured/new apps. How will I know if I want to install a new app if I just see its name/icon?
daas88
The ui still needs a lot of polish, but it’s giving some nice steps. I’m looking forward for a full synaptic replacement :D

News

Meerkat Software Centre UI continues to evolve adding new look, retweeting apps

Like us on Facebook!

Latest Comments

Our Most Popular Tweets

Meerkat Software Centre UI continues to evolve adding new look, retweeting apps

Most Read This Week

Like us on Facebook!

Latest Comments

Our Most Popular Tweets