3 ms·
I seriously don't get the hate... snaps are easy to manage, probably more secure than adding a bunch of PPAs (what many are doing blindly as soon as apt fails t
by Wxc2jjJmST9XWWL 6y ago
I seriously don't get the hate... snaps are easy to manage, probably more secure than adding a bunch of PPAs (what many are doing blindly as soon as apt fails them), and I didn't notice any performance hits using them. And it seems like it's probably far easier to simply create and maintain a snap than the alternatives. If this means creators distributing and packaging their programs on their own more often rather than unreliable package maintainers being in the driver's seat, what's to lose here exactly? From the user's perspective the interface is also very lean and clutter free.
$ snap search x
$ snap list
$ snap info x
$ sudo snap install x
I've interacted with snaps to a bare minimum, and I am sure all of those are correct. I am sorry, but "some nonsense about using snaps" -> "I quickly installed Debian" -> "this furthers my negative opinion of Canonical".
Talk about Canonical getting a bad rep for pretty much everything they do...
- somehnguy 6y agoYou might be right about snaps being great. I'm not giving them a fair shot, you're completely right about that. Here is the thing from my perspective though - I have never had any trouble with apt that has made me think 'I wish to use something else'. Apt works. It does what I expect it to. When you're just trying to get something that should be simple done the last thing you want to do is spend a bunch of time learning a new system that you didn't even ask for. When I try to use a project that includes a quick startup script that is rendered broken by something I don't even want...well I just move on. No big deal really, I'll just use Debian and if eventually I hit a point where I want something else I'll give it a try on my own time/terms. Not in the middle of trying to do something else.