• BartyDeCanter@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    1 year ago

    Could someone ELI5 whats wrong with snaps? I see hate for them all over the place but as an end user with little technical knowledge of linux packaging they seem fine? I can install them and use them, they don’t appear to have any anti-FOSS gotchas, so whats the big deal?

    • Solar Bear@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The server isn’t open source, so Canonical has the sole ability to control snap distribution. It’s also yet another example of Canonical’s “Not Invented Here” syndrome, where they constantly reinvent things so they can control it instead of working with the rest of the open source community. They also trick you into using snaps; for example if you explicitly tell it to use apt to install Firefox, it’ll install it as a snap anyways.

      Historically they performed really poorly as well, but my understanding is that they’ve largely fixed that issue.

    • notatoad@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      there was a time when they were slow, but that’s mostly been resolved.

      but it’s really just a cult thing now. people hate snaps because they think they’re supposed to hate snaps.

      • Solar Bear@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I hate snaps mainly because the server is proprietary. Everything else wrong is negotiable or solvanle, but that’s a nonstarter.