Good to know. Canonical has made some bad choices in the past (e.g. Unity) but, the Snaps thing was just too much for me. They are basically trying to lock everyone into their system and replace apt completely. I’d rather use plain vanilla Debian than use Ubuntu nowadays.
4 Likes
好久没见过这个桌面了
1 Like
For now. But, they seem determined to replace it. 
2 Likes
Yeah, I can agree. But most systems completely get Certbot out of date; that’s why the EFF recommends against using package managers to install it and use Snap instead. Even then, some also make do with older versions of the software.
@cys666, please note that this is an English-speaking forum and so you must speak in English or at least provide an accurate translation of your content. I’m gonna translate that with GTranslate for you:
Which desktop? The one in the first post?
Eventually they’ll replace APT with Snap on Ubuntu. But on Debian, it won’t ever happen at least 
2 Likes
My guess would be the Win95 desktop
3 Likes
So the one in the first post.
2 Likes
I do use them and I like them.
I prefer to use Flatpaks when I can, and almost every application I’m using on my system is installed through Flatpak. The only exceptions are:
- Command line tools (doctl, gcloud, hugo, lxd), which Flatpak simply doesn’t do.
- Applications that need to interact with command line tools (notably IDEs, such as PhpStorm), which I cannot get to work with Flatpak because Flatpak really doesn’t want me to.
I love these new package managers because:
- I’m no longer dependent on my OS provider to ship me up to date versions of packages.
- Developers can build their packages once for all OS flavors and versions without having to worry about compatibility.
- Apps are sandboxed. This isn’t 1972 where the only software you run is some BASIC code you wrote yourself. You often need to run complex third party code for which you can’t tell what it does. Applications aren’t me and shouldn’t have all the system access that I do.
- Data and configuration is conveniently placed. Is the configuration for the application placed in
.config,.local.$appName,Documentsor.cache? No, it’s in.var/app/$appName, and it cannot place the files anywhere else.
Sure, there are problems with Snap, such as the limited permission model and the closed application store. But the problems they were criticized for before, such as slow startup and lack of theming, have been fixed already.
I really want application sandboxing to succeed. It worked for Android and iOS and has resulted in really secure systems. I want my desktop to be safe too.
6 Likes
This is the part that I object to the most. I feel that Snaps are a way for Canonical to sell custom app stores to clients. If you want to use it, that’s fine. You should be free to. I just don’t want to be forced to use something because Canonical made the decision for me. I love the idea of virtualization and sandboxing. Those are great technologies. I hope they succeed too. I just want there to be free and open-source alternatives available so we never end up with the platform lock in that we get from Microsoft and Apple.
5 Likes
Theres also pip package that’s much newer.
1 Like
Um, pip is a completely different stuff IMO, that it focused on Python more, while it do install command-line tools that you could use a shell to interact with.
However I don’t think it will ever replace package managers like apt, yum, or whatever. Anyways you probably don’t think of pip when you need non-python related stuffs now.
4 Likes
This topic was automatically closed 15 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.