Skip Navigation

Don't use Appimages (a writeup about all the reasons they are a pain for users)

github.com GitHub - trytomakeyouprivate/dont-use-appimages: Appimages are an insecure packaging system with very limited use cases. Please use Flatpak instead!

Appimages are an insecure packaging system with very limited use cases. Please use Flatpak instead! - trytomakeyouprivate/dont-use-appimages

GitHub - trytomakeyouprivate/dont-use-appimages: Appimages are an insecure packaging system with very limited use cases. Please use Flatpak instead!

Appimages totally suck, because many developers think they were a real packaging format and support them exclusively.

Their use case is tiny, and in 99% of cases Flatpak is just better.

I could not find a single post or article about all the problems they have, so I wrote this.

This is not about shaming open source contributors. But Appimages are obviously broken, pretty badly maintained, while organizations/companies like Balena, Nextcloud etc. don't seem to get that.

178

You're viewing a single thread.

178 comments
  • Totally agree with basically every point here. You hit the nail on the head. App images are the .exe's of the Linux world and I don't understand how someone can say they love app images but hate Window's portable exe's. Even Windows doesn't have nearly as many portable executable as they once did. And when they do, most people (even those who prefer app images) prefer an exe with a Windows installer.

    Anyways, this is all to point out why I avoid app images if at all possible

    • As someone who didn't have a computer and had to install everything on a USB drive at some point, I absolutely LOVE portable .exe's. Don't see why anyone would have a problem with it. Don't see a problem with aopimages either.

You've viewed 178 comments.