anti-snap stance is anti-consumer
anti-snap stance is anti-consumer
cross-posted from: https://lemdro.id/post/9650372
The title is a quote from Mastodon. I’ve always seen dislike towards snap so I was taken back when I saw this stance. The person who wrote this was referring to Tuxedo Laptops.
What are your thoughts on this?
EDIT:
Here’s the original comment: https://mastodon.social/@popey/112591863166141029
All that because they made a distro based in Ubuntu but got rid of snap? Ok...
Out of the loop here, but can't just people install regular Ubuntu to use Snap?
Well yes. And I'm pretty sure they can just install snap itself.
Utter bullshit...
The cherry on top:
That's an interesting comment from a guy that used to work for Canonical, and then went anti-snap pretty hard, to the point that he made this:
Mint is anti consumer because you have to enable snap
Arch is anti-consumer because it doesn't come with anything.
Gentoo is anti-consumer because I'm still waiting for it to compile
Outside of certbot, I cannot think of anything that requires snapd over flatpak. I think certbot also has a PIP installation method anyways. I think it makes sense for everyone but Canonical to simply disable it or remove it by default. It's not personal, flatpak won the format war outside a few niche programs.
Nextcloud Server
I can only get it to work via snap and on Ubuntu. I've tried Ubuntu, Debian, Arch, Fedora, and NixOS for distro and both manual and snap. It doesn't even have a flatpak.
Use the OCI through podman or docker.
If you need snapd, install it. It's not like I now consider you a degenerate for using snaps. It's just a packaging format. I just understand why only Canonical enables it by default. If anything its annoying there is a handful of apps that provide snaps but not flatpaks.
Why are you reposting this? And to the same instance?
And, again, why didn't you bother to follow the thread of that comment? Quoting shit out of context is disingenuous.
https://mastodon.social/@popey/112593520847827981
Sure. Other people can do that if they want.
I don't have a problem with companies bundling whatever packages they want on their distro.
The difference comes when they actively block installation (just like Mint does). That is what is anti-consumer. It adds confusion to users as they have to go and find out what random file in /etc/ needs to be edited or removed, just to install some software. It's stupid.
You may disagree, that's fine. It's okay to not like things.
Btw i dislike Ubuntu in general and snaps in particular.
- The initial post was on !linux@lemmy.ml and I cross posted to !linux@programmijg.dev
- I have been following the thread on Mastodon but wanted the opinion of others (on Lemmy). I engaged with the OP to try and understand their perspective on this as well.