[gjsman-1000]

Which also goes to show how backwards Linux package distribution is at this point.

If you’re a small company, you can either build a web app which works everywhere; or you can deal with a distribution pushing out a buggy 3-year-old release against your will, with users harassing you about bugs.

Packaging on Linux for normal desktop apps was dead on arrival. It was never viable except for niche open source apps. The resistance to this fact makes the failure of the Linux desktop somewhat self-inflicted.

[jollyllama]

Sure, but this isn't particular to Linux. On what platform is it better? In terms of developer experience, web apps just beat distributing to the end-user device every time.

[Pet_Ant]

> On what platform is it better?

iOS

[jollyllama]

It's not better for developers on iOS. There are loads of complaints about the costs imposed on devs and the hoops they have to jump through to publish in the app store.

[gjsman-1000]

Linux repositories are objectively worse. Unclear guidelines, zero publishing control, patches against your will, removal of donation links or warnings if you anger the distribution maintainers, having to do this over and over dozens of times, I would take Apple any day.

And as you can see, 99.9% of developers took Apple’s route. Market share can only partially explain this, as even tiny platforms like Palm had better support than Linux.

[const_cast]

> And as you can see, 99.9% of developers took Apple’s route

Um, well no they didn't, because most things are web applications. And most software actually targets Windows. And then most phone software that's big is cross platform.

Apples' model is cool, but it certainly has a lot of drawbacks, and in many ways they did not win. They, too, lost to the web.

[gjsman-1000]

Every other platform.

Windows, Mac? Bundle your own updater. Or use Steam. Download one file and run with a click.

PlayStation? Nintendo? Submit it, wait about two weeks, and out it goes.

The Linux desktop is single handedly the worst distribution platform for an app developer, both in fragmentation and being unable to update your own software. The Linux desktop also had the arrogance to claim developers should do it their preferred way; and to harass devs for using tools like Flatpak. Then they wonder and complain and can’t understand why devs refuse to make Linux versions even for cross-platform frameworks.

The idea that someone like Adobe should make a package for each distribution, and negotiate with each distribution if they are sending out some ancient version of Acrobat, was a stupid power-trip philosophy on day one with none of the clout required. Even Apple doesn’t reserve the right to stonewall releases purely because of version numbers.

[jollyllama]

> Windows, Mac

You're neglecting all the parts where you've got to sign your install binaries.

> Steam

This is a third party marketplace that exists specifically to solve this problem and it carries all the baggage of any other third party marketplace, in the abstract.

> Video games

I'm not really shipping in these environments but I doubt it's that easy.

> Apple

They will happily stonewall you on many other small issues, however.

[gjsman-1000]

> You're neglecting all the parts where you've got to sign your install binaries.

This takes less than 15 minutes when you know how to do it. Arguing with a distribution takes weeks. Arguing with dozens of distributions could take months.

You are approaching this solely as a solo indie dev would - which is why, with few exceptions, only solo dev software is on Linux.

> They will happily stonewall you on many other small issues, however.

You should see even a fraction of what developers on Linux have been stonewalled over. I will literally take Apple.

[zevon]

Who or what is this "the Linux desktop" you speak of? ;)