|
|
|
|
|
by quotemstr
1458 days ago
|
|
Moving to Snaps gets us to a world of sandboxed applications, defined permissions, and OS version independence. That's the world that exists on mobile, and it's pretty great. Shouldn't desktop learn from mobile's successful experiment in sandboxing? |
|
Snap is a slightly worse, proprietary sandboxing mechanism pushed by Canonical, the people making money off it. It has some fundamental problems (boot being slowed down by all the snaps being mounted, for example, Firefox acting weird and sometimes not even launching until I reboot since 22.04) and some ideological problems (the fact you can't host your own snap store without paying Canonical, the fact Snap blatantly refuses to follow standards like XDG or even just folder naming in the home directories, forcing a lowercase "snap" folder on everyone).
Some people are against the appification that's taking a toll on user freedom. Some people are in favour of the excellent permission monitoring and dependency conflict resolution it allows. Both sides seem to conclude that snap isn't the right answer.