The next version of the world’s most popular desktop Linux operating system (that’s Ubuntu, for those playing dumb) comes with fewer apps available out-of-the-box.
Daily builds of Ubuntu 23.10 now ship with just a super-slim set of default software. These are designed to cover basic computing needs only.
For anything else, the idea is that we, the user, fire up the Software Store (though the new one isn’t included in daily builds yet) and install what we want for ourselves.
As an idea, it’s not without merit.
But in practice, I think it’s a potential misstep.
Basic as a Feature
For those new to the distro, the stock Ubuntu 23.10 experience is basic.
You can’t open office files, you can’t scan documents, you can’t even crop a photo…
They download Ubuntu 23.10 (possibly trying Linux for the first time) after hearing about how much better it is than Windows or macOS.
After installing it they boot up and login in and…
Well, they soon discover Ubuntu can’t do much – certainly not as much “out-of-the-box” as the closed-source system they just switched from.
They can’t create, edit or open any office files; they can’t scan documents; they can’t check their webcam works; they can’t analyse disk space; they need to listen MP3s in a video player (whose developer says shouldn’t be used for music); and they can’t even crop a photo.
As first impressions go, it’s not a good one.
“Joey, it’s 2023, most of us only need a web browser anyway”, some of you will say.
And you have a point (which I’ll talk more about a little later).
But looked at as a sheer value proposition: does this hyper-minimal Mantic install provide a better end-user experience (or give the impression of a being modern, capable OS) than the one it replaces?
I don’t think it does — and this could make the wrong impression on new users.
Pick Your Own Apps, You Lazy Animal
For as long as I’ve been using Linux I’ve seen people say: “Instead of distros shipping with a bunch of software I don’t use, it should let me pick the software I want”.
This approach sounds reasonable on the surface.
My favourite music player probably isn’t your favourite, and your favourite isn’t the next person’s, and so on. So why should a distro make a choice for us when it could leave the decision to us?
Such an argument does overlook one obvious fact: we’ve always been able to install the software we want, at any time we want (more or less).
Opinionated software choices have always been opinionated. Nothing shipped on Ubuntu’s ISO has ever been everyone’s favourite app (sorry, Ekiga). This is not a new problem.
To me, a considered and comprehensive set of software is part of what makes a desktop Linux distro a desktop Linux distro. Giving new users a complete, fully-functional desktop OS in a single download is, I’ve no doubt, what helped make Ubuntu the juggernaut it is today.
So unless people are returning Dell Ubuntu laptops or re-installing Windows because they can’t cope with Thunderbird or Simple Scan being on their systems — which we all know is unlikely — the decision to remove useful apps for everyone seems… Off.
Will new users know what apps they need?
It’s easy to install apps on Ubuntu, of course.
And though the new Flutter-based Software Store targeted to land in 23.10 lacks Flathub support (thus access to larger number of useful Linux apps) it does, in testing builds, greatly improve app discovery.
That should make it easier for “new users” faced with a minimal Mantic that doesn’t do much, to get their system up-to-speed.
But do average users — the kind who make up a fair chunk of Ubuntu desktop’s 6-million strong user base — want to go through the hassle of having to hunt for apps to do things as basic as crop an image or scan a document?
Plus, this “choose your own apps” adventure not only assumes everyone’s game to play, but that everyone knows WHICH apps they need. Choice paralysis could occur when they search for, say, “office” and they see:
Admittedly, installing 12 different office suites to find out which one is the best does sound like a fun way to spend an afternoon. But when all you need to do is open a DOCX your boss e-mailed you… Less fun.
Ubuntu is a distro famed for being “new user friendly”, remember.
Canonical for their part say these changes will, amongst other aims, “reduc[e] the time it takes for users to go from installation to productivity”. I’d argue the old ISO achieves that much better than the new one does.
“Internet is Everywhere”
“I never use LibreOffice, Thunderbird, Rhythmbox, or Shotwell so they shouldn’t be included” is a common refrain among existing users – but is your preference the best preferences for everyone?
When people download Ubuntu 23.04 they get an OS that can do everything Windows 95 did – with 23.10 they don’t
A lot of us now use web-mail, use Google Docs etc, stream music, and share photos direct from our phones rather than our desktops.
But crafting a desktop experience that assumes we all do those things — and to a degree, assumes we should be doing those things — overlooks those who don’t want to or can’t do them.
Cliche reference though it is but there are parts of world where internet is intermittent or data is expensive.
When people download Ubuntu 23.04 (or below) they get an OS that can do everything Windows 95 can, and do the majority of it offline.
With Ubuntu 23.10 they don’t.
They do get an ISO that’s not a few 100MB smaller in size but an OS that is less a lot less useful. To make it useful they have to download more stuff, which requires more internet, thus negating many of the arguments about making the ISO smaller.
Every used Ubuntu as a “live OS” booted from a USB to rescue data from a broken laptop, fix a broken install, or work on a temporary machine? You’ll now find that more difficult without an array of apps available out-of-the-box.
Rather than being a “more thoughtful default install” I’m wondering if Mantic is actually more thoughtless.
Free Software is Important
An existential (and somewhat ideological-based) anxiety is also linked to all of this.
If leading Linux distros no longer feel like they have to put free software front-and-centre, who will?
If leading Linux distros no longer feel obliged to put free software front-and-centre, who will?
Will new users ever hear, learn, or use them? Won’t they just flock to familiar brand names, or only discover Linux-supported software backed by large marketing budgets (and dubious EULAs)?
Providing privacy-respecting, functional (if not always flashy), and offline-capable alternatives to cloud-based, proprietary, and vendor lock-in tools feels more important today than it ever has.
Not just for those who don’t have 24/7 web access; not just for those who use older machines that can’t run (increasingly) bloated web-based tools well; not just for those wanting to escape to onslaught of online trackers, ads, AI, and manipulative “suggested content”…
But for all of us.
I concede that “most of us use web-based services now so legacy apps are pointless” is a compelling argument, and it’s made stronger still by “those who want legacy apps can install them if they want”.
But I think, as the world’s leading desktop Linux distro, Ubuntu should, more than most, continue to put some free-software salad on our collective plates — even if most of us will continue to cover it with chips/fries!
Ubuntu Already Has a Minimal Install, Btw
Finally, I feel a slimmed-down Ubuntu, contrary to the spin, gives us all less choice, not more.
After all, if you don’t want reams of pre-installed software on Ubuntu you (in 23.04 and below) have a choice not to: you tick the ‘minimal install’ option during installation and away it all goes.
That option is gone in 23.10. Everyone gets a minimal install whether they want it or not.
Some choice.
There’s no “full-fat” Ubuntu ISO people can download; no “full install” check-box in the installer; no “install recommended software” wizard that runs on first boot. Not even a Clippy-esque companion to pop up and say “it looks like you’re trying to open a DOCX file, you need to install this app”…
Can you tell I’m unconvinced?
There’s an elephant sat in the room as you read this.
If you’re reading a blog like mine you’ll find a minimal install a superb idea
If you’re “into” Ubuntu (or Linux) enough to read blogs like mine you’re already proficient.
To you, a stripped-back, slimmed-down Ubuntu that acts as a vanilla starting point on which you impose your preferences must sound like an utterly superb idea.
You know which apps you like, know how to install them, you know how to enable extra repos to get things Ubuntu doesn’t offer (the new app store doesn’t support Flathub which is where more “choice” exclusively resides), and so on.
But much of Ubuntu’s user base use Ubuntu as it comes. They don’t chase updates. They don’t constantly install new software. They don’t want to have to repeatedly Google “how do I…” every time they need to do something.
They want to be able to crop a photo.
Without decent defaults, without providing an OOTB experience that’s halfway functional for the majority (not merely a people pleaser on the Ubuntu Discord channel) it’ll be a challenge for Ubuntu to remain the all-round, general purpose, go-to Linux distro recommendation it currently is.
Optimism
If there’s a saving grace in all this is that most Ubuntu users stick to LTS versions. They’re unlikely to download 23.10. They won’t be affected by this ‘”‘minimal’ experiment.
But a new LTS is on the horizon. My hope is that the minimal install drawbacks Mantic makes evident are addressed during the next development cycle to ensure the needs of all (new and existing) Ubuntu users are considered.
It wouldn’t take much, either.
A few ‘thoughtful’ compromises and mitigation ideas:
- A first-run wizard showing an “install recommended software” button
- A ‘full installation’ option in the installer
- A dialog to guide users trying to open files without a supported app installed
- Commitment to showcase/promote FOSS apps in the new Software Store
I’m sure you have some ideas of your own – do share them in the comments.
Summary
I agree that Ubuntu’s pre-existing software choices are stale (I’ve bleated on about it for years), and I accept that we live in an era dominated by (largely proprietary, locked-in) web-based services. But I think the way to address these factors could be more “thoughtful” than this.
I’ve no-doubt I’ll (once again) be labelled a “hater” for sharing my disquiet – but so be it. I’ve been using Ubuntu for as long as I’ve been doing this blog. Then, as now, any concerns I have come from a well-intentioned place.
Ubuntu is special, and I want it to remain so.