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.
Counterpoint: I don’t like having more than one package manager on my system, which means things like Flatpaks and Snaps are out. With AppImages, I just double-click on the executable and off it goes.
So you prefer to not have any updates or secure verification, because you dont want a second package manager?
Dude you are the second package manager, and if you dont follow the whole gpg verification process I described in another comment, that is less secure.
I get that multiple package managers can be suboptimal (though I don’t have a problem with it as long as the integration is good).
But it still seems like a much, much better solution than just not having these applications managed by a package manager, as is the case with AppImages.
True. I would consider another package manager if it integrated into my system nicely and if I had more than a few applications outside my regular package manager. But I only have like two AppImages on my PC anyway, so I don’t mind updating them manually when I need to run them.
Thats flatpak with flathub. Also described in the post
That is the case for me with Flatpaks. They integrate really well into Fedora Kinoite - you have OS updates and Flatpaks all in a central UI, everything works as expected from any “App Store”.
