Everyone loves snaps

Flatpak ftw!
- 🤦
  
  No, that's not how you make one
  
  Snap and Flatpak have things in common (and I get that some people have objections to both), but Snap is significantly worse.

laughs in AUR
- btw

df -h hates this one simple trick
- I want to be high and mighty and dislike Snaps for all the technical reasons but the single most irritating thing is definitely all the loopback devices.
  
  Followed closely by ~/snap
  
  Fucking same, I had to write an alias so that df filters the loopbacks.

Snap made me switch back to Debian. Ubuntu was awesome for a long time, but having snap glommed onto everything so much that it kept showing up on my headless boxes was too much.

At least we have Mint and Kubuntu
- Kubuntu removed Flatpaks in favour of Snaps
  
  Mint for the win! I really hope they make LMDE the main branch in the longer term.
  
  What? I'm pretty sure I have access to Flatpaks...
- do you mean Kde neon? pretty sure kubuntu has snaps
  
  damn, I thought kubuntu got rid of that
- Pop!_OS is based on Ubuntu and also strips Snaps for Flatpaks AFAIK
  
  Yeah, it does, but if you try to install packages from apt, it still uses some Ubuntu repos and will try to sneak snaps and snapd in on you.
  All Canonical had to do was NOT push snaps through apt and I'd probably be fine with them.
  
  and also strips Snaps for Flatpaks AFAIK
  Neither of these are a feature.
- Fuuuuuuuuck kubuntu
  
  What's wrong with kubuntu?

Greybeard here. I don't know what a snap is.
- Package format controlled by Canonical that has a lot of issues currently
- It's apparently what you do into a Slim Jim™

I can't even use my smart card because Ubuntu keeps trying to install the snap version of Firefox which can't access the hardware. Why does it keep swapping out every time I update releases? Why won't it let me be happy?! /cry
- This is exactly why I'm switching to fedora. Just installed 23.10 and Firefox became a snap again. Ive been with ubuntu for over 10 years now, but I'm done.
  
  You could use Arch, btw. 😜🤣

OK I am more of a baby Penguin here, why do people hate Snap and Flatpack?
- Flatpak is fine. Snap is Canonical's proprietary version, which ties you specifically to their app store. It's not designed to be an open standard but Canonical has made it compulsory in one of the largest distros (Ubuntu) and its derivatives. There are also problems with its sandboxing mechanism competing with AppArmor.
  
  AppArmor and SELinux sandboxing stuff pushed me to only install services with Docker on my headless machines 😣 found out most services can't write to their own homefolder
- There was an Ubuntu developer that left Canonical about a year or so ago. His reason was that he had spent a number of years (possibly over a decade, can't remember) optimizing some code and the kernel to get the fastest boot time possible.
  Then he saw Canonical practically throw his work out the window by introducing snaps, which until recently was plagued by serious slowness on the first start of a snap.
  He said it felt like his years of work just meant nothing at that point.
  There are a number of reasons Flatpaks are a better open source option, even if they aren't perfect.
- This hate comes mostly from Linux communities like here and on Reddit. When you see actual numbers, both are widely used for production use. They have lots of active users as reported in their respective blogs and websites.
  That said, it is aware that both had problems. Most hate towards Flatpaks that I can see is from purists that prefer their distro shipping their packages with dynamic dependencies and uprated by their package manager. Also there is complains with outdated runtimes and stuff like how sandboxing works.
  Snaps has all problems than before with some extras. When they were released, because of compression, they were painfully slowly to open and they affected boot time. Nowadays this is mostly gone, but they still keep a proprietary store, inability to have multiple repositories (stores) and they don't respect your home directory structure by placing a "snap" folder in your home.
  Personally I use both and I'm happy with them. The proprietary store stuff does not bother me because I'm already trusting canonical binaries by using Ubuntu and they are easy to use and be productive with them.
- You could be a vet
  People shouldn’t hate either

Just a few days ago I wrestled with the overzealous sandboxing and security of the Chromium snap. Had to get a Flatpak and even then had to use some flags to get the proper permissions enabled. Next time I do a refresh I'm going with Debian.
- Give Linux Mint Debian Edition a look!
  
  With all respect I'd like to ask, why most people in comments avoiding Debian like plague? It's good OG distro, stable as fuck, i know about old packages and all, but after daily driving arch BTW™ for 5 years straight all i can say is, I'm tired boss, I'm tired of nonstop updating, I'm tired of dependency hell that coming if you didn't updated your system for half a month, I'm tired of resolving repeating dependency hell when you'll have to reinstall half of your system to get it work another week, I'm tired of modern filesystems that locking themselves up completely when something goes wrong, so I'm just decided to give Debian a chance, and you wouldn't believe it, it's heaven, when you can just power up your system and it just works, without any trouble, yes, i have dated software, but it's worth it, and yes, 8 years ago, my first distro was Linux mint, and it broke when i used OFFICIAL GUI updater tool to update version of my mint, also I've upvoted your comment and don't mean any bad

I am a Linux user for over a decade but I have no idea what this discussion is about. Can someone give me a tldr? I install some software using apt and some using the store and never have any issues.
- Snaps are ways to ship software where everything is bundled together and the developer doesn't need to sort out dependencies on the distribution. This often makes the package bloated. It has no direct benefits for users, but it makes life easier for developers. Thus, indirectly, users might get access to some software they would otherwise need to compile if no one's got it readily available for the user's distribution. Ubuntu appears mostly to be using it because they don't want to bother sorting out dependcies. On Ubuntu, and only on Ubuntu as fast as I know, some packages in apt will install the snap version silently, which, I think rightfully, annoys a lot of users.
  There are similar alternatives, like flatpak, which also bundle dependencies. Some aspects of snap are proprietary to Canonical, the makers of Ubuntu, so you'll find people who are ok with the somewhat bloated software if it makes software more widely available, but aren't happy with a proprietary format in what is largely an open community.
  
  Also sometimes run into weird permission problems with snaps, like with keypassxc browser integration.
- If you install an app with apt and it has a snap it automatically installs the snap
  
  I believe snaps are only installed by default on Ubuntu at this point. Debian has apt and I don't think it installs a snap version unless you asked for that.

I get all the reasons why people hate snaps, and I think they're all valid. And I appreciate people looking out for others and warning them about problematic software.
But man am I lazy, and I was really happy I didn't need to set up Docker just to run Sonarr on Bazzite. I'm pretty new to Linux, and that looked like a whole intimidating process.

I haven't had any issues with the few snaps I use so far
- The issues are more being worse than flatpak in most ways: Proprietary, bigger, slower, no support for external repos
  
  You had me at proprietary. But seriously, I use FOSS. I'll tolerate proprietary software if I have absolutely no other choice. There's absolutely no reason for me to put up with this bullshit. While it's a long way from the kind of shitfuckery Microsoft is so fond of, it's still completely unnecessary.
  
  Proprietary doesn't bother me at least not how snap is currently implemented
  I don't recall noticing a size difference between snaps and flatpaks
  I've found snaps as fast as flatpaks, but I know snaps has issues before I started using them
- I haven't had any issues with the few snaps I use so far
  My grandpa used to say something like the idea that he never had problems with the 'few' times he drove home drunk so far. Then he ran someone over.
  It's better to understand something is an avoidable risk BEFORE you're shown graphically.
  
  Yes, snaps are just like manslaughter
  
  Comparing Snaps to manslaughter is a new one to me, but why couldn't you have gone for the Godwin and compared it to Hitler?
- I ran ubuntu for a year and most my packages were snaps. It slowed my machine and made it lag so much. I now use arch btw
- DBeaver it's not on the repos, but it is on snap
  ¯(ツ)/¯

Has the meaning of this template changed? Like isn't the pink guy supposed to be a thing supporting the white dude so they can accomplish a goal they couldn't have done alone?
For example, the pink guy could be "Debian", the white person "Ubuntu", and the yellow goal "Being an awesome distribution".
- It's always been a thing holding white guy from getting to yellow goal, in the memes I've seen.
  
  TIL! Guess I saw the reverse once, and it's stuck with me. Carry on.

I like snaps.
- GET THE TORCHES AND PITCHFORKS!!!
  
  I like this comment.
- very brave of you to say that here
- I bet you also use systemd. You bastard.
  
  And loving it! 🍆
  
  What's your alternative? I've used OpenRC before and it was nice, but it didn't take long to find a use-case that systemd handled easily but OpenRC made difficult. Also a few packages expect systemd to be present and either fail to install or partially install so I had to figure out how to implement the missing functions in OpenRC.
- why? Do you mean "like" as in you'd rather have them than not, or that you think they're a good way to package apps?
  
  I think they're a good way to package apps. Superior to Flatpak for sure. I like Flatpak too and if Canonical abandoned Snap tomorrow, I'd switch my snap-packaged apps to Flatpak. The only non-bullshit downside of Snap is the proprietary server-side and the lack of multi-repo support. I don't care much about either because I know implementing either is fairly uncomplicated and it will happen should the reason arise. If Debian wanted to start using Snap, it'd take them a month to get the basics working with their own server side. If the client side was proprietary too, I'd have had a completely opposite opinion on Snap. Finally Canonical supplies all the software on my OS. I use third party repos only when absolutely necessary. If Canonical ran a proprietary apt server side, I wouldn't even know, apt doesn't care. Some of the myriad HTTP mirrors could easily be running on IIS, or S3, or Nexus. The trust equation for snap is equivalent.
- Just wait until you find out about flatpak
- I bet you do, don't you? THANOS!
- tie him to a pole and let's throw stones at him
  
  Don't threaten me with a good time.
- Oh snapers!