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.
One specific implementation by a terrible company that can barely manage to check quality control on their actual products isn’t a very good example of appimage’s problems.
Not saying they don’t have problems. But having seen creality’s version of Marlin, I gotta say, I’d be willing to bet they rebranded something, but using vastly out of date versions.
Probably should switch to simplify3d, prusa or cura.
While you’re not wrong, the problem I was referencing is an outdated library embedded in the image. It makes the whole app crash and it could happen to any app.
That’s a creality problem. Not an appimage problem.
They’d have a just as shitty flatpak or whatever else they used; because that’s how the company is.
Are you trying to tell me creality is the only one who would ever embed a library in an appimage? Isn’t that supposed to be half the point, that it comes with what it needs?
No. I’m telling you that they won’t maintain it properly.
Not when it’s a reskinned cura fork. There marlin (printer firmware- nominally more important) versions are old too… last I checked, by years.
