Why is it that all software isn't available when you in

>>58866431
>I have to just apt-get it.
So why don't you just do that?

>>58866458
I did, its not that I cant manage using terminal. Its just why is there no software available in the software center in the first place and just makes it look shitty and I have no idea why.

>>58866431
>Using Ubuntu Store
It's shit.

If you need a GUI like Ubuntu Store that doesn't suck, use Pamac or something (Arch only). At least that works.

I always tell people to just use apt because of the software center having weird issues like this.

>>58866477
Because they have two different audiences. The audience for tools like apt is for people who are either technically competent enough to learn to use it, or willing to become so. And because developers and sysadmins and distro maintainers and the like use these tools, they tend to work, though they're often at least a bit arcane. The complexity is something you can solve by reading a man page and using a search engine and your brain, so its viewed as an acceptable price to pay, especially for software that performs what is an inherently rather complex task.

The audience for a graphical no-sharp-corners too like the software center is people who refuse to be a part of the above audience. They don't want to have to think or learn anything, they want to just point and click and have everything done for them. Developers tend to look down on these people and rightly so. In the free software world, they're looked at as just a drain on resources, and endless support burden and source of stupid questions that will never contribute code or bug reports or anything. In the proprietary software world, they're looked at as just being a source of revenue. They don't have to be given something good, just something dumb enough for them to understand. Spending any effort making it better than it has to be is just a needless expense that will reduce the profit margin you make on selling to those people.

If you're willing to take the effort to learn to use better tools, you get better results. If you expect someone else to take care of you, you just get thrown scraps or taken advantage of. It was ever thus.

>>58866553
the software center doesn't need to be that complicated to be quality. Its basically just a frontend for apt anyways. It seems like it would take more effort to endlessly preen the soft to oblivion then to just let it go as an apt frontend.

>>58866630
You're overlooking the central point that everyone with the skills to improve it doesn't need it, they're smart enough to just use apt without a frontend. Hence the lack of enthusiasm and "whatever, good enough" attitude towards the software center. Even if it's not a lot of effort as you assert (I think this isn't the case, but set that aside) then its one more task for busy developers to do. And its not an interesting one either. Any surprise they punt on that so they can work on stuff that's both more interesting and more useful to them?