3 ms·

I completely do not understand snap hate. Imo, snap is one of the best things Canonical have done. I'm trying to read comments here to find what everyone who ha

I completely do not understand snap hate. Imo, snap is one of the best things Canonical have done. I'm trying to read comments here to find what everyone who hates it is talking about but I can't seem to find anything except for generic nothing. I searched for a previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23439326 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23439326. The linked article is nonsense... and most of the comments are either just as nonsensical or they actually like snap. The one criticism I find is that it is slow. The other seems to be around the idea that Canonical controls it too much for some people to feel comfortable... but other than that, I don't get it.

Darmody 4y ago
The other seems to be around the idea that Canonical controls it too much for some people to feel comfortable... but other than that, I don't get it. Why would we have to accept something semi-privative being shoved down our throats? I'm not going to accept Canonical behaving like Microsoft.
sorry_outta_gas 4y ago
Being slow is a massive issue, it's not something be dismissed
sliken 4y ago
It's closed source on the server side, proprietary, and has various issues. I was pretty shocked when they forced it into a LTS release, and the implementation was not optional and was terrible. They handles upgrades poorly, polluted the mount space, required manually cleanup, and destroyed boottimes. If you want containers, why would you go with a proprietary canonical technology instead of one of the better open source solutions? After all isn't one of the main promises of containers increased compatibility? Even the ubuntu derivatives are switching away from snap.