this post was submitted on 09 Jan 2025
43 points (100.0% liked)

Linux

8433 readers
471 users here now

Welcome to c/linux!

Welcome to our thriving Linux community! Whether you're a seasoned Linux enthusiast or just starting your journey, we're excited to have you here. Explore, learn, and collaborate with like-minded individuals who share a passion for open-source software and the endless possibilities it offers. Together, let's dive into the world of Linux and embrace the power of freedom, customization, and innovation. Enjoy your stay and feel free to join the vibrant discussions that await you!

Rules:

  1. Stay on topic: Posts and discussions should be related to Linux, open source software, and related technologies.

  2. Be respectful: Treat fellow community members with respect and courtesy.

  3. Quality over quantity: Share informative and thought-provoking content.

  4. No spam or self-promotion: Avoid excessive self-promotion or spamming.

  5. No NSFW adult content

  6. Follow general lemmy guidelines.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
MigratingtoLemmy@lemmy.world
43
KDE Plasma 6.3 Beta Released With A Ton Of Improvements (www.phoronix.com)
submitted 5 days ago by cm0002@lemmy.world to c/linux@lemmy.world
5 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] recursive_recursion@lemmy.ca 10 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

Alongside the Phoronix commentors I'm also of the same opinion that implementing Canonical's defunct Snap package system is a waste of time and effort.

At this point, everyone with an understanding of the 3 primary containerized package types should know that Snaps in comparison to Flatpaks or AppImage packages should be avoided if possible.

If Canonical open-sourced their backend I believe that snaps would no longer cause such aversion and backlash from the community.

[–] trevor@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Nah. Even if the Snapstore backend were FOSS, you should still avoid Snaps because the way they implemented sandboxing subtly breaks many applications.

Not to mention, they dishonestly co-opt your apt install invocations to sneakily install the Snap version. Actual Microsoft behavior. If a company is that eager to deceive you and shove their tech down your throat, you should avoid it at all costs.

[–] recursive_recursion@lemmy.ca 3 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

Nah. Even if the Snapstore backend were FOSS, you should still avoid Snaps because the way they implemented sandboxing subtly breaks many applications.

Fair; that is true.

Not to mention, they dishonestly co-opt your apt install invocations to sneakily install the Snap version.

🤨 damn that's pretty crazy if true. Knowing Canonical this could be real, I'll have to look this up.

Edit:
Confirmed this is true

Apologies for linking to rdit, but yeah Canonical what's going on with you

[–] caseyweederman@lemmy.ca 2 points 3 days ago

They also keep sneaking in new ways to get you back on snaps. It's like whackamole.