3 ms·

Ubuntu is build around snaps. Might as well tell a Windows user to disable running random installers downloaded from the web. Makes the OS mostly unusable.

pbhjpbhj 3y ago
I use Kubuntu, with snaps disabled, seems to all work fine. But I have been looking for a distro that's not using snaps -- they've just been a buggy mess for me and the apps I've used that installed that way were all broken. MX Linux is looking good for when Canonical finally double down and make every installed binary have its own mount point. FWIW, I use WinGetUI to install from MS/Chocolatey sources rather than going off finding installers when using Win10 too. (Though it's a terrible UX compared to `aptitude`, imo.)
- timbit42 3y ago
  I use Linux Mint and install KDE Plasma.
- constantcrying 2y ago
  Why would you do that? It's clear canonical wants you to use snaps, there are actually distros near identical to Ubuntu whose developers aren't hellbent on you using snaps. Do whatever you want, it just seems bizarre to me that you would go to lengths disabling snaps when you could just use a distro without them.
  - pbhjpbhj 2y ago
    I'm embedded, simple. Changing distro is a big thing after maybe 18 years. It was easier to disable, so far, than it was to fix the apps that failed as snaps. But, I intend to move, when Canonical go all in on snaps and 'disable' just turning them off. I'm suspecting 24.04 might be that point. But it was delayed and I've not had chance to check it out yet. In some ways the distro is like a part of my identity; it's a personal decision, not a business decision as I'm a home user only now.
loloquwowndueo 3y ago
Ubuntu is NOT built around snaps. They’ve been slowly “forced” upon the OS but it’s perfectly usable without.
- constantcrying 2y ago
  The company behind Ubuntu desperately wants you to use snaps. They continually push them more and more into the users.

pbhjpbhj 3y ago

I use Kubuntu, with snaps disabled, seems to all work fine. But I have been looking for a distro that's not using snaps -- they've just been a buggy mess for me and the apps I've used that installed that way were all broken. MX Linux is looking good for when Canonical finally double down and make every installed binary have its own mount point. FWIW, I use WinGetUI to install from MS/Chocolatey sources rather than going off finding installers when using Win10 too. (Though it's a terrible UX compared to `aptitude`, imo.)

timbit42 3y ago
I use Linux Mint and install KDE Plasma.
constantcrying 2y ago
Why would you do that? It's clear canonical wants you to use snaps, there are actually distros near identical to Ubuntu whose developers aren't hellbent on you using snaps. Do whatever you want, it just seems bizarre to me that you would go to lengths disabling snaps when you could just use a distro without them.
- pbhjpbhj 2y ago
  I'm embedded, simple. Changing distro is a big thing after maybe 18 years. It was easier to disable, so far, than it was to fix the apps that failed as snaps. But, I intend to move, when Canonical go all in on snaps and 'disable' just turning them off. I'm suspecting 24.04 might be that point. But it was delayed and I've not had chance to check it out yet. In some ways the distro is like a part of my identity; it's a personal decision, not a business decision as I'm a home user only now.

loloquwowndueo 3y ago

Ubuntu is NOT built around snaps. They’ve been slowly “forced” upon the OS but it’s perfectly usable without.

constantcrying 2y ago
The company behind Ubuntu desperately wants you to use snaps. They continually push them more and more into the users.