Is this @pizzalovingnerd ? He looks just like him
Comparing AppImages to Flatpaks is a bit of a stretch.
Agreed, I think AppImage has a strong future
what are snaps? - me a linux mint user
AppImages are completely different thing versus Flatpak and Snap.
I use Appimage and flatpack, but not snaps.
I’m not sure why you reply this to me directly.
Sure. Streaming and DVDs are also completely different things but both deliver media to your TV. The consumer chooses what the consumer wants.
The comparison does not hold up, because for watching films it does not matter on what medium it is. But for applications it has huge implications for maintaining versions, updates, creating packages with or without runtimes and dependencies and a repository and so on, that work differently on operating systems and so on. This goes way beyond just the user choosing the format.
Afaik snaps are (or should be) actually better in theory, but unfortunately its backend is proprietary.edit: nope, outdated info
app images need to not be called app images. first time seeing it it sounds like some macos thing. but even still I don’t see why they get compared so much to flatpak and snap when they are completely different.
They serve the same purpose: Install software, that’s not in your distro‘s repository.
I used to hate AppImages until I had Snap forced on me. Then i thought AppImages weren’t so bad and I fled Snap by running straight into the arms of Flatpak
I use flatpak and app images for different uses.
App images are like portable exe files for onetime use apps. Like Rufus
Flatpaks are like installable exes from the devs website. Used for apps I want to used and use again on my machine.
Yeah Flatpacks aren’t really “competing” with Appimages the way they are with Snaps.
Flatpaks are only “competing” with a small portion of what snaps do.
Oh ok I didn’t realize that. I’ve personally never encountered a situation where I needed a Snap because a Flatpak lacked functionality.
Snaps are more comparable to nix, really. They can provide system services and even your kernel. Flatpaks and AppImages are only really about distributing desktop apps, but the rest of the system still needs to be provided another way.
I like both flatpaks and appimages why does everything have to be a victory and defeat
Because it’s nice for devs to have a single package type to build per OS
Neither Flatpaks nor AppImages can provide those.
Why can’t they do that already? Just choose whichever one you want it’s trivial for me to run whichever as a user
Just not snaps.
AppImage and flatpak are fine though
Whats wrong with snaps? My only “issue” with appimages is i tend to leave them in my downloads folder and lose them
There’s an appimaged daemon you can install that will manage them, and it watches a bunch of folders to integrate appimages with xdg and whatever window manager you’ve got.
~/Applicationslooks like an easy pick, or~/.local/bin.Appimages you decide to keep you can just move there!
Why do you keep appimages? I don’t do that and now I’m wondering if I do something wrong. But I try to install from repos as much as possible.
I’ve used one or two tools that only distribute for my system as an appimage or as source code.
I can’t always be bothered to set up a compilation environment or deal with removing dependencies.
I only use one or two regularly, but it’s nice to have them integrated!
I prefer from the distro’s repos, then source, then flatpack, then appimage. Sometimes you have to take what you can get!
The appImage is the program. If you don’t keep it, you don’t have the program.
The snap store is a shit show of security issues.
Forced migration to snaps.
Performance issues.
Proprietary back end.
Slow to install
Slow to start
Eat up RAM
Eat up disk space
They screw up access to devices.
They automatically update themselves without user confirmation.
Fuck snaps. Fuck Canonical.
Gearlevel is a good app to tidy up the Appimage apss.
My issues with snaps are:
- The server software is closed source and centralized
- They create many block devices that can slow down booting the PC.
I didn’t realize, damn.
snaps are essentially ubuntu-only
I have an ~/app directory for appimages
Ty for both
Correct
Recently I wanted to uninstall $thing. Couldn’t via the package manager. I had forgotten that it wasn’t a native package. So what was it? *scratches head* Flatpak, snap or Appimage? Aw damn, it’s an AppImage. Now where did I put the binary? *scratches head*.
I present to you: https://flathub.org/en-GB/apps/it.mijorus.gearlever
I think it’s really funny that it’s a flatpak used to manage AppImages
I know right?! ;)
Maybe you would like appimagelauncher. It allows you to define a directory for storing your appimages and you just put them in there and you can automatically launch it from the system menu as if they were installed apps. It also makes removing them easier, since they’re all in the same directory and you just remove them and the shortcuts get deleted as well
The fluxer appimage will ‘install’ itself into /opt/ without your knowledge. I think because it’s essentially an electron package similar to stoat, standard notes and discord, large parts of it can self-update without needing to bump the actual package version, but this is really shitty behaviour considering what appimages are designed to do.
In ~/Downloads/
If you can run it, it shouldn’t be more than a couple of clicks to find it.
Uhh…should probably get yourself in order because that sounds like a you problem to be completely honest
It’s not that big of a deal to package in both flatpak and appimage.
Yeah, it’s called .deb
Well that’s not gonna work on rpm based distributions now is it
How is that my problem
How is that my problem
Well let’s break it down…
You thought:
Yeah, it’s called .deb
Was an acceptable response to:
Because it’s nice for devs to have a single package type to build per OS
Your problem was your stupidity.
But now your problem is everyone knowing about it.
Jesus fucking Christ, it’s like you had your sense of humor surgically removed.
I think you’re the one lacking a sense of humor if you thought your comment was funny instead of making you look like an ass.
Ah yes, the ol’ people are annoyed at the actions I chose to take, so I’ll call it a joke defence
It goes a long way to simplicity from both a user and dev to have only one package type to deal with and distribute.
This completely. Speaking as a person who’s more tech skilled than 99% of non-programmers, i can tell you that installing apps is the main tech hurdle for Linux getting mainstream adoption.
There are non-tech hurdles too, but of the actual technology being easy to use then app installation is really the only aspect left that regular people can’t do without a huge dive of tech learning that’s beyond what most people can do.
-
Installing on mac: click the Mac download button and follow the prompts.
-
Installing on Windows: click the Windows download button and follow the prompts.
-
Installing on Linux: there’s no Linux download button, there’s a couple of buttons that say words you’ve never heard of before. They look kinda like buttons to download an app. You click one and try to open it, but it just shows an error, etc etc etc
As a longtime Mac user, that’s not quite as easy. Some apps are only available through the Mac App Store. For applications you download there are several variants:
- installers: double click and go through an install wizard with next buttons
- zip files: double click to unpack, then put the app wherever you want (typically /Applications or ~/Applications)
- disk images: double click to mount. Then drag and drop the app to /Applications
- through macports or homebrew via command line
- there are a couple of Apple system tools, that are often installed via command line like Rosetta and Xcode command line tools
Of course you can have a zip file, that contains a disk image, that then contains an installer.
For applications downloaded from the internet, you also get at least a warning when opening it. If it’s not notarized, you have to go to system settings to be able to run it. For many applications, you also need to go to settings and fiddle with sandbox settings to make them work.
New users are often challenged by all these options. There are many who end up running an app from a disk image for example.
You might also need to select the correct architecture because some applications don’t provide universal binaries for some reason.
While installation is an issue for Linux, the bigger issue is the low availability of quality commercial software. The immense fracturing between distributions creates tons of issues as well.
-
I’d agree with that sentiment, but at least for me, if we went with all flatpacks, i’d be losing the one ability that I like about appimages, which is as a one-time-use type of “installation”. They’re kind of like those windows EXEs that you could just run in place without needing to install. very useful for stuff like raspberrypi imager where I don’t need to keep it around much
appimages also allow some sort of portable apps you can carry around. Very useful for dealing with no internet scenarios. I also use appimages for things iI use very rarely and don’t want to bother to have them being updated regularly along with the system
Come on, you know if a dev doesn’t offer an appimage, someone is going to shit on them for it.
why does everything have to be a victory and defeat
there can only be one standard.
But what if it doesn’t cover my specific usecase?
Compile from source
Damn, I was hoping to lead you into the relevant xkcd :p
I thought of it too :)
We heavily prefer flat earthers aks but app images aren’t that bad, like someone else said they’re like portable programs
I fucking love appimages. I dont have any issues with Flatpak. I just like appimages more and i can get them for almost all of my stuff. So idk if flatpaks won. But i also dont care.
I love flatpaks and your attitude
AppImages are great! It reminds me a lot of how software is packaged on MacOS and I think it hits that perfect trifecta of powerful, simple, and easy to use
AppImages integrate better, but despite including roughly the same amount of overhead bullshit as a flatpak, have been less reliable for me overall. Flatpaks are too isolated, even when they’re supposedly installed properly.
What the fuck happened to distro packages? .rpm, .deb?
yeah my use case is lift and shift so appimage is what I use.
I prefer appimages, it feels much more “open” than flatpak ever will.
Flatpak: install flatpost and flatseal.
Appimage: Download appimaged appimage to ~\Applications and run once.
then
Flatpak: Go to site for cool software I heard of, see it’s flatpak with a link on the page. Click link, wait for flatpost to open, wait for flatpost to update repos, get cool software and possibly another copy of mesa and gnome compat stuff, then head to flatseal to fix drive/device permissions as needed.
Appimage: Go to site for cool software I heard of, see it’s an appimage, download said appimage to ~\Applications, appimaged automatically loads in a desktop entry and we’re done.
As far as updates, all the appimages that are in active development that I use, offer auto-updating when I open them, plus I’m not reliant on a centrally-controlled repo of the packages (which if it dies, takes all updates with it).
I feel appimage would be an easier adoption for people fresh to linux, as it follows the same model as windows or macos (download executable, install app), even for the initial setup of appimaged.
And either way, there’s no “winner” here, if we’re playing that game, native installs still win. Every distro supports (and uses) those by default, except for ubuntu, who has money on pushing snaps.
native install wins
If you’re not using Arch, native install typically means outdated version.
For example all Ubuntu 24.04 based distros like PopOS and Mint ship neovim 0.9 from 2023! 0.11 is the current version. What’s the reason to keep a package that’s not part of the core functionality of the operating system on such an ancient version?
Snaps are kind of the right idea. Provide a stable base system with current version user apps. It’s just not well implemented.
They aren’t really in competition, also AppImages don’t update as easily.
I don’t think Flatpak “won”. Flatpak makes sense for it’s use, but AppImages also make sense for other uses, and even Snap has it’s place.
It just happens that Flatpak has become the more “popular” method on many desktop Linux set ups, as Flathub integrates well into software stores and the shared dependencies can be more efficient (if you use a lot of Flatpaks).
AppImages are great for self contained portable apps with minimal local dependencies needed, and especially if something is pretty much “feature complete”. They aren’t quite as convenient in terms of keeping them updated or integrating into desktop environments seamlessly (they can be if you visit AppImageHub and install the AppImageLauncher - doesn’t work for me thought - but even then they’re not really as well integrated into desktop environments as Flatpaks have become).
If you were to use lots of programmes, AppImages would potentially take up more space than the same apps in a Flatpak setup because AppImages do not share dependencies while Flatpaks can (if dependencies are the same version). But AppImages are also ultraportable and can run on an even broader range of distros and setups than Flatpaks. AppImages don’t require any installed tool locally to run, while Flatpaks need Flatpak installed. Both Flatpak and AppImage are bloaty compared to direct installs from a distros repos, but thats a trade off for their benefits (containerised, easily deployable across different distros etc).
Snap is proprietary particularly around snapd’s hardcoded dependence on Canonical servers despite being otherwise open source. So it’s not really been embraced by most distros outside the Ubuntu ecosystem, and even then there are Ubuntu derived distros that deliberately remove Snap. Snap does have its strengths in the server space (which Flatpak is not designed ofr), but Docker is the more popular system for this. Snap is still used “widely” in the sense that Ubuntu is widely used and Snap is its default, but outside that ecosystem Docker is much more extensively used (and probably on a lot of Ubuntu servers too). Snap in the desktop set up is also slower than Flatpak due to how it works, which adds to the perception they’re “worse”. Still Snap is convenient in the Ubuntu server space for deploying software.
Flatpak and AppImages aren’t going anywhere. Who knows with Snap; probably not going anywhere?
they can be if you visit AppImageHub and install the AppImageLauncher - doesn’t work for me though
I use AM/AppMan with a local install. So far, it’s been pretty good.
I use Docker and apt instead. The definition of an application lives in a single text file and you don’t give it anymore resources or permissions than it needs.
So much so, that I wrote a bunch of scripts to make life easier, without ever needing to go anywhere near appimage, flatpak or snap.
cool but isn’t the whole point of flatpaks to provide an alternative for when the “apt” version doesn’t exist?
I use apt, but you don’t have to, instead you can use any package manager from any distribution and use that distribution within the container.
If an application isn’t packaged, you can use the same mechanism to compile from source.
IMHO, if it’s not packaged and you can’t compile from source, it’s time to look for a different application.
hard disagree I much prefer appimages over flatpaks.
