5 ms·

Snap is a pile or garbage and I really wish Ubuntu would just stop trying to be a little different all the time. They learned their lesson with Upstart but I gu

Snap is a pile or garbage and I really wish Ubuntu would just stop trying to be a little different all the time. They learned their lesson with Upstart but I guess it'll be a few releases until the abandon Snap.

pbhjpbhj 4y ago
Hmm, it's good to try to be different, bit they certainly shouldn't push "different" stuff when it doesn't even work yet. I've not minded the transition to systemd, for example. Snap has been awful, I don't like it and every time it's pushed that bit more I feel like Canonical are behaving like Microsoft somewhat. Debian is looking attractive. Abandoning snap is not enough, it's more about respecting users ... but they are obviously under no obligations to me, I'm not paying.
- ethbr0 4y ago
  Ubuntu moving window control buttons to the left circa 10.x was that straw for me. Not because it necessarily made anything harder, but because it was an arrogant change for no goddamned reason. UX should start with humility -- if you change things that lots of people are used to then you'd better have some damn good reasons.
  - unethical_ban 4y ago
    Keeping the clock and widgets in the upper right while unifying the header window and app window was the reason. You can dislike the reason, but you can't say there wasn't one. RIP Unity
    - tmtvl 4y ago
      What do you mean "RIP Unity"? Ubuntu Unity got accepted as an official flavour just recently.
- kevin_thibedeau 4y ago
  Canonical is doing a great job replicating the BOFH. It's an integral part of the traditional *nix experience.
Tsiklon 4y ago
Mir would have been a better thing to point out as a poor technical decision. But Upstart came out before SystemD and was used by other distros, most notably RHEL5 + 6.
- voidfunc 4y ago
  I totally forgot about Mir.
- worik 4y ago
  Unity. Especially the first version
  - Tsiklon 4y ago
    I grew to like Unity as time passed, the global menu, and the global search was great. Its initial launch was rough, but given how poorly Gnome 3 was received I think it was a valid path to explore
    - worik 4y ago
      They could have debugged it before the upgrade forced it on users. It was awful.
- torginus 4y ago
  I'm not sure about that - Wayland hasn't exactly been a runaway success either. The 2 key issues with Wayland, the fact that it's a protocol, meaning a lot of stuff needs to be handled by the window manager that was handled by the platform before, and its opinionated design, that made it very hard to port software that wasn't designed exactly how it wanted to be, meant adoption was (and is) very slow, and still kind of ongoing. Mir didn't have these issues.
marcodiego 4y ago
> They learned their lesson with Upstart Upstart worked well for its purpose. It gave me zero problems and a faster boot until systemd came along. It was a good stop gap solution and was adopted by other distros including ChromeOS. People like to criticize the "different on the block" and although I think most of these complaints are for good reasons, so much is learned from these mistakes that we should not be so avert to them. I don't think snaps are better than flatpaks, but I'm glad there is an alternative to it under a different management and having a good influence over it (IIUC, "portals" were born in snaps, not in flatpaks).

pbhjpbhj 4y ago

Hmm, it's good to try to be different, bit they certainly shouldn't push "different" stuff when it doesn't even work yet. I've not minded the transition to systemd, for example. Snap has been awful, I don't like it and every time it's pushed that bit more I feel like Canonical are behaving like Microsoft somewhat. Debian is looking attractive. Abandoning snap is not enough, it's more about respecting users ... but they are obviously under no obligations to me, I'm not paying.

ethbr0 4y ago
Ubuntu moving window control buttons to the left circa 10.x was that straw for me. Not because it necessarily made anything harder, but because it was an arrogant change for no goddamned reason. UX should start with humility -- if you change things that lots of people are used to then you'd better have some damn good reasons.
- unethical_ban 4y ago
  Keeping the clock and widgets in the upper right while unifying the header window and app window was the reason. You can dislike the reason, but you can't say there wasn't one. RIP Unity
  - tmtvl 4y ago
    What do you mean "RIP Unity"? Ubuntu Unity got accepted as an official flavour just recently.
kevin_thibedeau 4y ago
Canonical is doing a great job replicating the BOFH. It's an integral part of the traditional *nix experience.

Tsiklon 4y ago

Mir would have been a better thing to point out as a poor technical decision. But Upstart came out before SystemD and was used by other distros, most notably RHEL5 + 6.

voidfunc 4y ago
I totally forgot about Mir.
worik 4y ago
Unity. Especially the first version
- Tsiklon 4y ago
  I grew to like Unity as time passed, the global menu, and the global search was great. Its initial launch was rough, but given how poorly Gnome 3 was received I think it was a valid path to explore
  - worik 4y ago
    They could have debugged it before the upgrade forced it on users. It was awful.
torginus 4y ago
I'm not sure about that - Wayland hasn't exactly been a runaway success either. The 2 key issues with Wayland, the fact that it's a protocol, meaning a lot of stuff needs to be handled by the window manager that was handled by the platform before, and its opinionated design, that made it very hard to port software that wasn't designed exactly how it wanted to be, meant adoption was (and is) very slow, and still kind of ongoing. Mir didn't have these issues.

marcodiego 4y ago

> They learned their lesson with Upstart Upstart worked well for its purpose. It gave me zero problems and a faster boot until systemd came along. It was a good stop gap solution and was adopted by other distros including ChromeOS. People like to criticize the "different on the block" and although I think most of these complaints are for good reasons, so much is learned from these mistakes that we should not be so avert to them. I don't think snaps are better than flatpaks, but I'm glad there is an alternative to it under a different management and having a good influence over it (IIUC, "portals" were born in snaps, not in flatpaks).