Nothing really. Distros have different goals. Some distros have more access to bleeding edge updates than ubuntu.
Some don’t like that ubuntu forces you to use the snap store, which is proprietary, with packages that are larger and run slow and hog a lot of memory compared to other package managers (such as apt)
yeah, many packages now defaults as snaps in ubuntu.
firefox being a single but prominent example, the package on apt simply installs the snap now. You can get around that but you’ll have to add mozillas repository. It’s Canonical’s proprietary thing so I guess it makes sense.
He’s gonna do an enshittified distro, just you wait…
Well, if it acts as a gateway drug (like ubuntu), then we are on the good side, right?
Maybe. But it’s only really a gateway drug in my opinion.
I’ve only ever tried one distro. Please enlighten me on what’s wrong with Ubuntu.
Nothing is really wrong with any distro. They each just have they general strengths and weaknesses. Different distros for specific tasks.
It’s all just a flame war.
Ubuntu is fine. But Caninical has made business decisions that are 100% inline with the typical foss intent.
Nothing really. Distros have different goals. Some distros have more access to bleeding edge updates than ubuntu.
Some don’t like that ubuntu forces you to use the snap store, which is proprietary, with packages that are larger and run slow and hog a lot of memory compared to other package managers (such as apt)
This is starting to be some years back, but I was exclusively using apt when I was using Ubuntu, have they gone away from that?
yeah, many packages now defaults as snaps in ubuntu. firefox being a single but prominent example, the package on apt simply installs the snap now. You can get around that but you’ll have to add mozillas repository. It’s Canonical’s proprietary thing so I guess it makes sense.
Honestly I’d be funny to see