Don't use Appimages (a writeup about all the reasons they are a pain for users)
![](https://feddit.de/pictrs/image/1cf3ef33-6bff-4f81-9ac0-403388fd20ac.jpeg)
![](https://lemmy.ml/pictrs/image/q98XK4sKtw.png)
![GitHub - trytomakeyouprivate/dont-use-appimages: Appimages are an insecure packaging system with very limited use cases. Please use Flatpak instead!](https://lemmy.ml/pictrs/image/096cc79e-b91c-4aad-928a-fb7291ef77a4.png?format=jpg&thumbnail=256)
github.com
Appimages totally suck, because many developers think they were a real packaging format and support them exclusively.
Their use case is tiny, and in 99% of cases Flatpak is just better.
I could not find a single post or article about all the problems they have, so I wrote this.
This is not about shaming open source contributors. But Appimages are obviously broken, pretty badly maintained, while organizations/companies like Balena, Nextcloud etc. don't seem to get that.
You are viewing a single comment
Lucky kids. I remember when I switched to Linux and encountered my first app store (Synaptic). That was already such a huge improvement over random
.exe
s, and app stores today are way, way better.Damn even i was impressed by apt install command so much the first time
Package managers are fine. Walled gardens are not.
Absolutely. Luckily there are plenty of non-walled garden solutions on Linux, e.g. Flatpak.
I mean, snap could also be not. Just somebody needs to write a wrapper that allows to download, verify etc. .snap packages from other repos.
Shitty move of Canonical for sure.