linuxmemes

Same as the Unix wars and Vim vs. Emacs.

Except the specific distro you use impacts your choices and the future direction and success of Linux as a whole.

If you pick the single enshittified distro then you serve to perpetuate it's influence.

I'm not sure that's why.

My two cents: I got really annoyed with windows after a random update pushing stuff I don't want or need, so I spun up Ubuntu. I've used a lot in the past, but stopped using it because of anti-cheat in some games, got tired of switching whenever I wanted to play.

Coming back, I find out about snaps. Not a good start, but I found instructions to revert to the good old apt packages I wanted. But then I spent way too long trying to coax the taskbar/system/clock to appear where I wanted them to, plus having things working well in my multi monitor setup, and at some point I just went back to Windows.

I couldn't care less about distro squabbles, but I do care greatly about usability and polish, and it seems like we're taking steps back here.

Femcel: I will flatten you if you disagree with me <3

Sorry, there's one thing about the OS|software|product|company|person|car that we don't like, so we all have to glom on, downvote it to the basement and tell you why we hate it so much.

/s

I'd say snaps are aimed at servers. A big aspect of both Flatpaks and Snaps is the whole sandboxed environment thing.

I think that's a major reason Canonical flubbed snaps, is they shoved them down the throats of casual users instead of focusing on using them in server situations where you want things more "locked down."

Once again, it does seem silly that they reinvented the wheel, but I mean, that's actually really common. So common there is an XKCD comic about it. So due to how commonplace such a thing is, it seems weird to attack Canonical so much over it.

I use Ubuntu desktop for my server! What can I say? I installed it one night on my desktop to see how it felt and my experiment turned into an entire fucking server because "already here. More convenient."

It's popular and widely used so people naturally hate it.

forcing snaps on people (if you apt-get firefox it'll install the snap even though you didn't install it with snap), adding ads for it, snap having a proprietary backend, snap being essentially just a fundamentally worse version of flatpak.

the only advantage i've heard for snap is that it's easier to package for.

Plus I think if you want the advantages of a stable release, easy for user, distro, they'll also need to be immutable now, what's the usecase for a non-immutable, stable, easy to use distro?

If you didn't care about ease of use, you wouldn't want immutable, but if you do, you absolutely do.

If you don't care about stability, you might not care about immutable, but if you do, you absolutely do.

Ubuntu seems like a prime usecase for an immutable distro, but it isn't for tradition-related reasons rather than it actually being good for users.