• Ooops@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 years ago

      It’s a bad, slow and inefficient solution for a problem that is already solved. And because nobody would use their proprietary shit over flatpack, they force the users to use it. Even for things that exist natively in the repositories and would need neither snap nor flatpack.

      • shininghero@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        I still don’t even know what problem snap and flatpak were intended to solve. Just apt or dnf installing from the command line, or even using the distro provided store app, has always been sufficient for me.

      • yaaaaayPancakes@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        Flatpack isn’t without its own quirks and flaws. There is no One True Way. Being open-source, there shouldn’t be one.

        It is definitely slow though, mostly on first run.

      • 520@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 years ago

        The main reason is that it is completely controlled by Canonical, with no way to add alternative repos.

          • 520@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 years ago

            You can, but that completely negates the reasons why you’d want to have a repo system in the first place. You gotta do the legwork to get updates, for example.

            • JoeyJoeJoeJr@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 years ago

              This isn’t necessarily true - a developer choosing to not include their app in a repo can always opt for a self-updating mechanism.

              Don’t get me wrong - repos and tooling to manage all of your apps at once are preferred. But if a developer or user wants to avoid the Canonical controlled repo, I’m just pointing out there are technically ways to do that.

              If you’d question why someone would use snap at all at that point… that would be a good question. The point is just that they can, if they want to.

      • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        For computer idiots it’s not bad at all. It mostly just works if you don’t mess with it and Canonical relies on it to ship software for Ubuntu. It’s one of those you should know what you’re doing situations if you’re using standard Ubuntu and messing with it. If you remove it, you will have to figure out what’s shipped via snap and how to supplant it if you want it working, among other potential headaches.