This news shouldn’t be a shock to anyone. Ubuntu is just doing what they’ve been doing all along, and that is trying to push they’re snap packages.
As long as distros give people the option/ability to install in other ways I don’t see a problem. Now if Ubuntu out right banned any other way to install apps that would be big news.
If you try and use apt to install Firefox, it secretly uses snap anyway. Shit like that is a problem
good news is ubuntu is pushing me to flatpaks, those still work
Yeah, I don’t see much wrong with it as long as it works as well as any other installation option and stays maintained.
Interesting thought about banning other installation methods. I can’t think of how they’d actually do any of that besides going fully immutable. 🤔
deleted by creator
rolls eyes
I’ve tried a few big apps in flatpak form, and usually they’re much bigger, and noticeably (many seconds) slower to start up. (Haven’t tried one with less than 4 cores, so can only imagine they being much slower.)
You wanted to say snaps are slower, right?
Well, could’ve been clearer, my experiences apply to snaps and flatpaks. Huger and slower. And I imagine that on older machines, with fewer cores, slower drives or less ram, possibly unuseable. (Don’t know.)
I do know that I’m seeing a lot less ‘Electron’ - framework apps (FAT and cycles-sucking) being released these days, doesn’t seem too popular.
Appimages are easier to install but have only tried a couple. ‘Stellarium.appImage’ is MUCH slower to load, but OK in operation.
I’d enjoy hearing the -measured numbers- and how many people prefer prefer these FAT formats and why.
Snaps are a great way to:
- ruin single source of truth for state of installed software
- … and contents
- … and dependencies (dependency hell is always self-inflicted)
What a dumb, dumb idea. We already avoid debian/ubuntu because of the validation lack in the packaging, but this is just comically bad.
