Appimages, snaps and flatpaks, which one do you prefer and why?

  • Kalcifer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    2 years ago

    Flatpak – It’s not without it’s own issues, of course, but it does the job. I’m not fan of how snaps are designed, and I don’t think canonical is trustworthy enough to run a packaging format. Appimages are really just not good for widespread adoption. They do what they are designed to do well, but I don’t think it’s wide to use them as a main package format.

  • chickenwing@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    2 years ago

    Flatpacks give me the least trouble so I guess those. All though appimages seem alright too. Snaps however seem to never want to install. I like the idea of easy one click installs for every distro but I think we are a few years away from that.

  • MrBubbles96@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 years ago

    None. I prefer native packages. AUR usually has me covered and hasn’t broken my system…ever, really. Yet, anyways. (Well, it might have broken my Manjaro install, but it is Manjaro, so i probably sneezed wrong)

    …but, if I had to pick one? Flatpaks. Outta the three, they’ve given me the least trouble and just work right out the gate. Still prefer native packages tho

  • RegalPotoo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    2 years ago

    AppImage is a nice idea, and avoids some of the performance overheads from containerised systems, but lacks a reasonable self update mechanism, lacks code signing and the desktop integration (having icons show up in the start menu) is poorly implemented.

    Snap is essentially a Canonical-proprietary apt replacement with some very serious drawbacks around performance and desktop integration (themes).

    Flatpak has some drawbacks but it largely achieves it’s design goals, and actually provides some advantages over installing things via the system package manager.

  • Rhabuko@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    Flatpaks because their updating works (compared to my experience with Appimages) and the Apps starting instantly (compared to my limited experience with snaps). But sadly, a lot of production software doesn’t want to support either of this package formats? I haven’t seen support from Davinci Resolve or Mari, as an example.

    • Random Dent@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 years ago

      Same here. I don’t really like Appimages because (AFAIK, unless there’s some tool I don’t know about) you have to just check each one individually for updates which feels old fashioned, like Windows.

      Snap is just a worse version of Flatpak as far as I can tell, so I don’t bother with it.

  • Lettuce eat lettuce@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    2 years ago

    Flatpaks are quickly becoming my favorite. I’ve rarely had issues with App Images, but they are clunky and messy. Flatpaks are where it’s at IMO.

    Snaps are pewpy.

      • Lettuce eat lettuce@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 years ago

        You have to use a separate application to manage them, otherwise they act as portable .exe files in windows, just laying around in a folder you have to manually link to or navigate to to run. You have to set them as executable manually otherwise you can’t run them in certain distros, or they force you to click through the prompt. They aren’t listed in the general packages installed on your system.

        They are often bulky in size, and depending on the distro and software, sometimes they don’t work properly. And again, without independent management software, they have to be manually updated independently.

        They aren’t bad, they just arent as good as other options IMO. I like App Images for random small programs, or some games too, they aren’t a problem. But for large programs I want to use frequently, they are just less convenient.

  • warmaster@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 years ago

    Snaps, hell no. I wouldn’t touch anything Canonical TBH.

    Appimages are very chaotic.

    Fkatpaks leave a bunch of trash after uninstalling.

    I use Flatpaks, while they are not perfect, they are improving.

  • Rega@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 years ago

    Flatpak is the best one imo. Never used appimages, and snap is pure trash (close source, slow, made by canonical). Overall, native packages are imo the way to go, but flatpak is also fairly good.

  • OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 years ago

    Appimages are good for downloading off sketchy websites, Snaps are good for server CLI apps, Flatpaks are good for GUIs

    But honestly they all solve the main issue pretty well

  • Lolors17@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 years ago

    Definitly Flatpaks. Although snaps have improved since I last used them. But of all I still prefer the good old shell based Package manager.

    • gaybear@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      I prefer all of them (including Snap) we should have a kid together and ask them their preference.

  • Tippon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 years ago

    I’m still trying them out, but if they work as advertised, then AppImages. That’s mostly because I use my desktop and laptop pretty much equally, so being able to copy and AppImage from one to the other and keep going would be really handy.

    On a similar note, if a computer dies, being able to just copy and paste them to a new computer, or run them from a portable drive would be great.

    • Sohrab Behdani@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      yes appimages are good but my problem with them is that when there is a new version i should download them again and again…