4 ms·

Flatpak is great for people who wish they were running Microsoft. Others can just run a distro for people who believe in open source software.

by neilv 1y ago

tombert 1y ago
I run NixOS so I have my own opinions on the best way to package software. I'm just saying that I think Flatpak is, if nothing else, good for people who want to transition away from Microsoft. My parents are both pretty smart people but I genuinely doubt that I would be successful in converting over to Linux if they have to type `sudo apt search my_package` and then `sudo apt install my_package` all the time. For people like them, who have been on windows for the last thirty years, I think that Flatpak is great.
- j45 1y ago
  Agreed. Also the majority of people like to do things with a computer other than, or rather than work on the operating system. I like customizing my OS. But it shouldn’t be a barrier or gatekeep beginners out.
- yjftsjthsd-h 1y ago
  > if they have to type `sudo apt search my_package` and then `sudo apt install my_package` all the time. As opposed to the much easier `flatpak install com.fqdn.app.name`? Don't confuse underlying package format with CLI/GUI; Synaptic, GNOME Software, Plasma Discover, etc. are fine ways to install normal packages.
  - tombert 1y ago
    I've had it set up so you can just double-click the Flatpak files, not too dissimilar to an exe download.
- the__alchemist 1y ago
  You don't have to be non-technical to prefer a simple, non-memorize-text way to install things.
TheFreim 1y ago
> Others can just run a distro for people who believe in open source software. What about Flatpak is contrary to open source software as you seem imply? Flatpak itself is free software, so is most of the software packaged with it. There are quite a few good reasons to use Flatpak, especially for developers who want to make their software available on different distributions without wanting to worry about packaging separately themselves. There are valid criticisms of it, but being somehow against open source software or being somehow related to Microsoft is not one of them.
- j45 1y ago
  People don’t seem to understand the world doesn’t have to accept a solely form of packaging - theirs. Flatpak might not be for me, it certainly helps get some beginners to Linux going. If they outgrow it, that’s great, or maybe they never need to.
- neilv 1y ago
  Calling it (edit: using the term) "free software" is a great example of utterly failing to promote your own principles, and stabbing the entire mission in the face. Let's try to repurpose an incredibly widely used pre-existing term, that means almost the opposite of the essence of our entire mission, to mean our mission. And every time people tell us that's moronic, we double down. As we continue to watch people somehow totally miss the point of the mission, but surely the fact that we're mind-bogglingly self-sabotaging at advocacy can't have anything to do with that. We should totally keep stabbing ourselves in the face. IMHO, it is one of the most shameful failures of marketing of the last century.
  - TheFreim 1y ago
    Flatpak is unambiguously and undeniably free and open source software and the fact that you think it isn't demonstrates that you have been misinformed. The Flatpak project is licensed with the LGPL. Furthermore, the vast majority of software packaged with Flatpak is free and open source software. https://github.com/flatpak/flatpak https://github.com/flatpak/flatpak
dartharva 1y ago
It's the opposite. Windows users don't procure their software from centralized stores, they install them from each of their individual installers downloaded from their respective websites.

Flatpak is great for people who wish they were running Microsoft. Others can just run a distro for people who believe in open source software.

by neilv 1y ago

Flatpak is great for people who wish they were running Microsoft. Others can just run a distro for people who believe in open source software.

tombert 1y ago

I run NixOS so I have my own opinions on the best way to package software. I'm just saying that I think Flatpak is, if nothing else, good for people who want to transition away from Microsoft. My parents are both pretty smart people but I genuinely doubt that I would be successful in converting over to Linux if they have to type `sudo apt search my_package` and then `sudo apt install my_package` all the time. For people like them, who have been on windows for the last thirty years, I think that Flatpak is great.

j45 1y ago
Agreed. Also the majority of people like to do things with a computer other than, or rather than work on the operating system. I like customizing my OS. But it shouldn’t be a barrier or gatekeep beginners out.
yjftsjthsd-h 1y ago
> if they have to type `sudo apt search my_package` and then `sudo apt install my_package` all the time. As opposed to the much easier `flatpak install com.fqdn.app.name`? Don't confuse underlying package format with CLI/GUI; Synaptic, GNOME Software, Plasma Discover, etc. are fine ways to install normal packages.
- tombert 1y ago
  I've had it set up so you can just double-click the Flatpak files, not too dissimilar to an exe download.
the__alchemist 1y ago
You don't have to be non-technical to prefer a simple, non-memorize-text way to install things.

TheFreim 1y ago

> Others can just run a distro for people who believe in open source software. What about Flatpak is contrary to open source software as you seem imply? Flatpak itself is free software, so is most of the software packaged with it. There are quite a few good reasons to use Flatpak, especially for developers who want to make their software available on different distributions without wanting to worry about packaging separately themselves. There are valid criticisms of it, but being somehow against open source software or being somehow related to Microsoft is not one of them.

j45 1y ago
People don’t seem to understand the world doesn’t have to accept a solely form of packaging - theirs. Flatpak might not be for me, it certainly helps get some beginners to Linux going. If they outgrow it, that’s great, or maybe they never need to.
neilv 1y ago
Calling it (edit: using the term) "free software" is a great example of utterly failing to promote your own principles, and stabbing the entire mission in the face. Let's try to repurpose an incredibly widely used pre-existing term, that means almost the opposite of the essence of our entire mission, to mean our mission. And every time people tell us that's moronic, we double down. As we continue to watch people somehow totally miss the point of the mission, but surely the fact that we're mind-bogglingly self-sabotaging at advocacy can't have anything to do with that. We should totally keep stabbing ourselves in the face. IMHO, it is one of the most shameful failures of marketing of the last century.
- TheFreim 1y ago
  Flatpak is unambiguously and undeniably free and open source software and the fact that you think it isn't demonstrates that you have been misinformed. The Flatpak project is licensed with the LGPL. Furthermore, the vast majority of software packaged with Flatpak is free and open source software. https://github.com/flatpak/flatpak https://github.com/flatpak/flatpak

dartharva 1y ago

It's the opposite. Windows users don't procure their software from centralized stores, they install them from each of their individual installers downloaded from their respective websites.