| This is a rant against snaps. Well, lets get to it. Sorry, snaps are a LOT slower than just running a binary. Did I said they're slow, well they're slow. I have an SSD and it feels like it's 1992 and I'm trying to run some snap from a Cyrix without cache and 16MB of RAM. I switch to binary version (oh my chromium), and it freaking flash, 0.x sec. and you're there, the full app is available. Snaps are a NO GO my friends. Besides having LOTS of problems running out of the standard GUI (Gnome3), or even in the standard (supposedly heavy-tested) GUI, they are slow. Sorry, I've already said that uh? SLOW, that's snaps. If there is somebody from Ubuntu here, please take a serious look about how snapped apps (pun intended), read/write $HOME defaults. I mean we have to have defaults somewhere. So thingies like the colour theme, the theme engine, default download path, etc. are fully followed just as the user has configured them. I use Ubuntu, but I certainly would not be using in the future if my applications which now take merely 0.x seconds to open start to take, 3-4-15! seconds to open. I fact I started to look to Debian and Fedora, they currently appear to have saner defaults than Ubuntu. No, the second time I open an app in a session doesn't count AT ALL for the speed. |