[jakebasile]

If you don't like Snap, use a distro that doesn't use Snap. If you pick a Snap distro it's just making your life harder for the sake of being difficult.

This applies to many things in Linux world in addition to Snap:

- systemd/sysvinit

- Wayland/X

- apt/rpm

- Musl/glibc

[pbhjpbhj]

Yes, but when you just update as you've done many times and then several of the main apps don't work, then it's not a case of 'just pick a non-snap distro' as you already did that. Canonical have been aggressive in changes to snap only, reversing changes that would normally prevent their install. Now they've gone with 'pro', again using the installation system against their users.

When you've used the same distro (Kubuntu for me) for many years, the forced choosing of a different distro with the need to migrate, ... it's like you're back with Microsoft again.

I'm still unpicking the situation because moving ones family to a new OS is hard work (for me).

[jakebasile]

Ubuntu was never a non-Snap distro. It was always a distribution provided by Canonical wherein they make decisions for you based on their own criteria. Snap became one of those decisions. I can't help but think of "Open Source is Not About You" by Rich Hickey.

If Canonical is, as you say, using Ubuntu _against_ users (and not, in what is much more likely, simply making a decision that you disagree with) why would you want to continue using it? They have root on all your systems via apt.

Personally, I can't wait to try the all-Snap flavor whenever it's ready. I'm curious if it will work for my usage (gaming in particular).

[pbhjpbhj]

Well for example, like Firefox did with the Pocket add-ons, making "pro" essentially unable to be removed using the packaging system despite it not being an actual integral component of the system.

Both of these I consider to be extremely user hostile moves as there was an establish way to implement the behaviour, but the company subverted that to prevent removal - presumably because they (rightly) presaged that "their" users would not want the changes.

Yes, distros make decisions that users won't agree with (SysV v SystemD, say). But, within that it never seemed like structural changes were made solely to prevent users from removing advertising (pro) or solely to prevent users from avoiding installation of specific apps (as with Snaps).

To me, there has been a sea change, a clear line crossed towards user hostility. I've been with KDE since KDE3 (maybe 2, I can't recall), I know about effed up updates and projects being opinionated - this isn't just that, to me it's a malevolence. Hence why I'm jumping ship.