[compsciphd]

I'll take a contrarian/devil's advocate stance. for some applications and some usage scenarios, snaps makes a lot of sense.

Take a multi user system and users who run applications like chromium or firefox.

It's dangerous to upgrade the application while users are running them as the files the running applications depend on can change thereby making them either break in weird ways or force the end users to restart them.

if these apps were just distributed as snaps, it wouldn't matter. they would keep on using the old image without any problem, while new executions would get the new image. If one really wanted to encourage them to exit and restart (i.e. some security hole), the same mechanisms that exist today to get people to restart could be used.

with that said, I think it should be a choice, not something force down our throat. if I install something with apt/dpkg , I expect it to be an apt/dpkg package, not a snap. if I want to use snap, I'll install it with snap.