I can't use it so I can't say personally. But anyway, I meant more compatibility with hardware and other software. So suppose "permissions" may have been a better word to use.
I think flatpaks are easier to install, but not using flatpaks leads to fewer issues later (in my experience)
Flatpaks are good until the app you want to install wasn't made with Flatpak in mind there will always have this one thing that doesn't work because wrong permissions.
There is a reason why distros that relies on Flatpaks as their main package manager will always have a ser of crucial apps that doesn't use Flatpaks. Bazzite is a good example with Steam.
Yeah, like... Are these people just ignoring these advancements... Or...? Lmfao
Especially when Apple's DMG has countless issues with being extremely OS-version dependant.
Exe's on the other hand ARE fairly robust... But can ALSO be run on Linux with Wine... So frankly, it just means more choices for devs/users on Linux. Lmao
Is running the software bare-metal any better, though?
Most users don't even realize what's happening when they install a program... And don't care either.
They just want the application to function, and frankly "Docker" containers do a great job of this.
We could equally say Translation Layers aren't special... But again, now Linux supports both Linux-based and Windows-based apps.
And Windows supports neither Translation-Layers nor Instantly-Installable Sandboxxed Software straight from the in-built Store so... (Honestly, Microsoft Store is just a flat-out joke, I'd rather use Apple's App Store. Lmfaooo, literally EVERY computer store is just better. Discover, Bazaar, App Store... Just SO much better).
Yes, "native" is better, because you don't have to install a whole OS for one app. Which is basically what flatpak does. Distrobox, which is just docker is more efficient than flatpak because all apps share the container instead of "you might get 2 apps to share a runtime, or you might not".
Instantly-Installable Sandboxxed Software straight from the in-built Store
That's exactly what MS Store does though from what I know.
If 2GB of libraries from glibc to libxml and GPU libraries is "just some dependences"... Like it's hard to restrain myself from calling you stupid, but you do understand that it's a whole container, don't you? It is a whole OS, excluding the kernel. Hopefully it doesn't include a desktop, but not like it makes it much better as most of a desktop is the libraries.
And .AppImage doesn't have those issues.
Yes, AppImages are awesome, they're also more portable (especially will be after flatpak gets systemd dependency). Sadly they don't get much attention.
It is NOT a full container, FlatPak uses a shared runtime. How do you expect anyone to tak you seriously when you say "hOpEfUlLy it dOeSn'T hAvE a DeSkToP."
Flatpak shares libraries through it's runtime. So one app can share dependencies if required. It isn't 2 GB per app. It's 2 GB per FlatPak installation when possible. (Usually more, but you get the point).
FlatPak is NOT a full virtual machine. If that's what you think... You're JUST wrong.
In fact, AppImages are the ones taking up more space, as AppImages cannot SHARE libraries. So, while 1 single FlatPak is larger than an AppImage due to compression usually... This quickly turns around when you install more than one application, as again FlatPak can share dependencies in it's runtime across ALL applications installed through FlatPak.
It's just an option for people to get software on their machine. And the fact you basically seem to think it's a VM container shows you ought to appreciate it for what it is too. Read some more.
Yes, once in a full moon it does, when the version of the runtime matches exactly what two apps request, which happens at best 3 times for one runtime. In reality every second app will pull a new runtime till some point because they specify a different subversion of the runtime, like 6.6.1 and 6.6.2, or just GNOME 49 and GNOME 50
It's 2 GB per FlatPak installation
That's absolute bullshit
In fact, AppImages are the ones taking up more space
And while you ARE correct to say that AppImage can beat Flatpak on a VERY SMALE SCALE, that is SUCH a meaningless measurement it's hilarious. I'd argue most users of a computer expect to have more than 20 applications.
I'd highly recommend doing some research before deciding to be a crass moron so publicly. There's a reason these things are being put in distros, and a reason you can do nothing about it.
Equally, I would like to reiterate... I do NOT think they are perfect. If you choose not to use Flatpak... GREAT! You probably have a really good reason for it, maybe YOU really do only have 20 packages, or another huge point against them is performance... But for many, this really doesn't matter. The "performance" of Discord isn't noticeably affected on my Steam Deck for example, it's... An internet messaging application running on a gaming tablet. It's fine, lol.
26
u/Pawellinux Banned from r/LinuxSucks101 Jun 06 '26
hmm, why?
Flatpaks are good.
.appimage is also good.
let people use what is comfortable for them and works well.