• umbrella@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    snaps (and the way canonical is pushing them) are awful at best. snaps are the one reason ive been meaning to hop right now, but its not the first time canonical pulls shit like this.

    • TheAnonymouseJoker@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      8 months ago

      Snaps can sandbox system applications, with no competitor capable in sight. So what is this shit Canonical is pulling?

      • milicent_bystandr@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        8 months ago

        a) having apt packages link a script that downloads the snap. That’s the first problem I had, back when I used Ubuntu as as snaps were rolling out. It gave me big trouble updating on bad internet connection.

        b) making the server fixed and proprietary, restricting the freedom to do things differently and offer different changes to other users, that we’re used to in the Linux and FOSS world

      • umbrella@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        in addition to what the guy said:

        how it doesnt respect standards like XDG, and how painfully slow it is.

          • umbrella@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            not at all. speaking as someone who replaced snaps for flatpaks because this specific issue was bothering me a lot.

            • TheAnonymouseJoker@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              I was using Snaps until last year just to know how they are doing. Snaps did not feel much slower. However, I felt like I became mature enough to use Debian, so jumped ship.