It's the opposite of the way things should be. Package managers should have the most utility for applications that update frequently, because isn't the raison d'etre of a package manager to make updating programs easier?
Some distros manage to get it right. I haven't had any trouble using OpenSUSE Tumbleweed's packaged Firefox.
I run Debian stable on my workstation, and manage most of my packages with `apt`. As such, everything "just works," and flawlessly.
For the handful of packages that I want to upgrade aggressively, I manage them with Nix[1].
I've been doing this for maybe two or three years, and despite a little extra complexity, it feels like a best-of-both worlds scenario. I get the rock-solid stability of Debian stable, but the one or two packages that need to stay cutting-edge are able to do so.
I also don't have trouble with package conflicts, because the entire point of Nix is to prevent those kinds of problems.
The package repository should be the off-the-shelf items in the grocery store, while installing separately is the big-ticket and custom made items. Installing apps separately doesn't scale very well, but it makes sense to just do it for firefox and certain others. IMO.
Firefox is "big ticket", but not "custom made"; one firefox package or installer should suit everybody fine. I think package managers can do very well with Firefox if the package is managed well.
Exactly. I use Linux mint (without snaps) and Firefox works great. It updates pretty frequently through mint’s software update tool, which is just running apt and installing package updates.
All this talk of snaps and using PPAs sounds like a an unnecessary headache. What’s the point of a package manager if it doesn’t keep your packages up to date?
You are right its not the fact that it updates frequently. It is when the distro package is an inferior option either because of version or build options.
Some distros manage to get it right. I haven't had any trouble using OpenSUSE Tumbleweed's packaged Firefox.