4 ms·
It sounds like you are talking about snap or flatpak. These are extremely unpopular on HN.
by jsmith99 3y ago
It sounds like you are talking about snap or flatpak. These are extremely unpopular on HN.
- ramshanker 3y agoYes. I am in the support-snap-flatpack camp, and was really surprised by HN hatred towards it.
- sofixa 3y agoWell they are new and different, what more can you expect from the crowd here? (Only slightly joking). They have their issues, that's for sure (e.g. flatpack's broken for a long time sandboxing model, snap doing weird things with mounts, the backend being closed source) but honestly they solve so many issues with desktop/client facing software they're a no brainer.
- krageon 3y agoA closed source backend means it shouldn't be used. I would say there is more than enough history in the software world that explains to you why this is the case, even if it is just kind of convenient right in this instant.
- rightbyte 3y agoThe main problem with Snap is that it is user hostile (forced auto updates) and propertiary to some degree. Canonical is just up to some no good. Containerization in general is aatter of taste.
- 3np 3y agoI don't see flatpak getting the flak that snaps do. Personally I fall in the camp of "snaps bad; flatpak all right". There's no shortage of posts and comments expanding on this stance.
- dathinab 3y ago> These are extremely unpopular on HN. idk. HN just mainly complains about some implementation details. Like flathub applications often not being sandboxed, yet. Or Canonical forcing certain update strategies and similar on snap users.