• 520
      link
      fedilink
      171 year ago

      The main reason is that it is completely controlled by Canonical, with no way to add alternative repos.

        • 520
          link
          fedilink
          6
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          You can, but that completely negates the reasons why you’d want to have a repo system in the first place. You gotta do the legwork to get updates, for example.

          • @jj4211
            link
            21 year ago

            And to be explicit about it, zypper, dnf, apt, flatpak all have a specific mechanism to declare repositories and one ‘update’ check will walk them all.

            snap does not, and manually doing a one off is useless. AppImage also has no ‘update’ concept, but it’s a more limited use case in general, it’s a worse habit than any repository based approach.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            11 year ago

            This isn’t necessarily true - a developer choosing to not include their app in a repo can always opt for a self-updating mechanism.

            Don’t get me wrong - repos and tooling to manage all of your apps at once are preferred. But if a developer or user wants to avoid the Canonical controlled repo, I’m just pointing out there are technically ways to do that.

            If you’d question why someone would use snap at all at that point… that would be a good question. The point is just that they can, if they want to.

    • Avid Amoeba
      link
      fedilink
      5
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      For computer idiots it’s not bad at all. It mostly just works if you don’t mess with it and Canonical relies on it to ship software for Ubuntu. It’s one of those you should know what you’re doing situations if you’re using standard Ubuntu and messing with it. If you remove it, you will have to figure out what’s shipped via snap and how to supplant it if you want it working, among other potential headaches.

      • @EvacuateSoul
        link
        31 year ago

        No, it does not just work. It removes the option to install updates manually through GUI. If Firefox was running, the only GUI solution is to close it and wait 6 hours or whatever.

        My wife was perfectly fine installing updates from the tray with Synaptic. The PC is always connected to the TV with Jellyfin left open in Firefox where she was watching.

        So I switched to Manjaro to have a pretty OS that isn’t getting rid of their package manager controlling the most used program.

        • Avid Amoeba
          link
          fedilink
          2
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Ever since the fix for the “Pending update” notification, updating Firefox has been as complicated as closing it and reopening it when you see the notification. The pending update is installed immediately after closing it. It just works for my wife. ☺️

          Also I wouldn’t leave her dead without automatic updates.

          I’m glad yours enjoying Manjaro. 👌

          • @EvacuateSoul
            link
            21 year ago

            I didn’t know they fixed it now, good to know.

            • Avid Amoeba
              link
              fedilink
              21 year ago

              Yup. Actually I should have said implemented instead of fixed. The implementation was sizeable. I saw some of the PRs. From a user point of view it was a defect fix but in reality it was a non-trivial implementation. I guess that’s why it wasn’t there from the get go.

      • @ChunkMcHorkle
        link
        English
        11 year ago

        Those are all valid points, but there’s one more. As a person who is just coming back to Linux after 25-30 years and relearning it all from scratch, I just don’t want the hassle.

        Sure, there’s overlap between distros, Linux is Linux, and any knowledge I might glean from Ubuntu would also largely apply to any other distro – but why should I bother with investing time into a product that is already heading toward future politics and regressive policies when I can just install [NotUbuntu] and swerve the entire mess?

        There are hundreds of distros from which to choose these days, literally. Why start with one that’s already obviously moving toward the dark side? For all that I could just stay on Windows. I’m trying to get away from triple-E and paywalls and gatekeeping, not just find different ones.

        Right now I’m testing out over a dozen distros on an old laptop in my spare time, and I think the only Ubuntu related one in my list is Pop!_OS, and it’s there only because Pop!_OS doesn’t rely on snap.

        It’s one of those you should know what you’re doing situations

        And I absolutely DO NOT, so that’s that, lol. These days every brain cell counts, so damned if I’ll waste any time wading into that mess.

    • @aesthelete
      link
      31 year ago

      I hate it for the refresh nag messages alone.

      The default Firefox in Ubuntu is a snap and I only knew that because due to nagging and having to restart constantly while I was using it and had to learn about snaps and how to install Firefox without them on Ubuntu.

    • Ooops
      link
      fedilink
      2
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      If something exists in native form, use that. If it doesn’t or you want some sandboxing (and there is at least some argument for a containerized version that brings all its needed dependencies, for developers not having to test for every linux for example) there’s flatpack or appimage. Snap is just Canonical’s proprietary alternative to flatpack. And also worse in basically any aspect. So they shove it down their users throat instead. Even for stuff that would be available natively and should just be installed via the normal package manager. And to make really sure, nobody is avoiding their crap, they also redirect commands, so for example using apt to install your browser automatically redirects your command to snap install…