Yeah I love it, Debian feels like opening a featureless gray box that just says "OS" on the front. Add whatever you want. A blank canvas. It's as close to "generic" Linux as you can get.
I installed mint on my second PC, and it's great. I feel like migrating my main, but I'm not sure it would go smoothly. I've had a lot of issues with my four months old Ubuntu install, lately the keyboard is nonfunctional at the login screen about half the time. Snaps are another reason making me want to leave it behind.
I don't mind Snaps in a vacuum, but the unforgivable thing is that they messed with the package repo so that instead of installing a deb package as I intended, it installs a Snap stub which I did not want. If Canonical hadn't forced them on users in that way, I'd have been fine with them.
Instead, back to Debian I went (sorry I ever left, actually)
So I didn't realize that the snaps logo is an origami bird.
"It was like a piece of self-opening origami, or a rosebud blooming into a rose in just a few seconds. Where just a few moments earlier there had been a smoothly curved black disk, there was now a bird. A bird, hovering there." - Douglas Adams, describing the Hitchhiker's Guide, Mk. II, from Mostly Harmless.
That is a very biased claim. It's like saying that the PS5 is the most successful gaming platform because God Of War: Ragnarök and Ghost Of Tsushima players prefer it over Xbox and PC.
Did they say it's the most successful project? Because Sony saying that the PS5 is a successful platform because players prefer it over other options doesn't seem biased at all. It's just an objective statement of fact
If you go to snapcraft.io, you can see snap being installed on many other distributions other than Ubuntu. It will not show you the exact numbers, but people willingly install it on their machines. I think that's successful.
I don't think "there exists an unknown number of non-Ubuntu machines with snap installed" is a valid metric when the general sentiment seems to be apathy. It's popular for the same reason Internet Explorer was popular -- it's forcibly installed with the default OS.
If the numbers were favorable, Canonical would release them.
It’s not successful though. Like, maybe if your measure of success is that it’s usable, sure. But no other OSes have adopted it. Not even Ubuntu’s downstream OSes like Mint or Pop_OS!.
Users don’t like it, vendors don’t like it, other OS maintainers don’t like it. I’m not sure why that would be considered successful.
I agree, have seen so many people trying to document how to "desnap" Ubuntu and wondered why bother, you are fighting against what is now the whole point of Ubuntu while trying to use Ubuntu while so many other options exist.
I do happily encourage folks to explain why they left Ubuntu behind as I did (snaps). No confusion, just a reiteration of disappointment that they went from being my favorite distro to completely off my list with the snap stuff.
Nix, guix, flatpak, and OSI images are all better "universal" packages managers on sheer technical merits while also not be a vendor locked proprietary solution.
snaps are a proprietary vendor-locked format, the only redeeming quality is being able to run them in cli (once Flatpak get that too, there is no valid reason for snaps to exist).
I just find it midly infuriating (if that even is a thing, meaning I hate it but it's not that significant for me to distro hop on my work laptop) to have two "universal" package formats on my system with Canonical shoving the objectively worse one (from a free/libre pov) down my throat...
no you didn't, you can install flatpak using the terminal but iirc flatpak are mostly made with GUI applications in mind, while snaps support installing command line utils quite well
The backend is proprietary and you or other orgs cannot run their own server. It's harcoded to use Canonical's servers for obtaining snaps and their metadata...
seething Ubuntu fans are funny af lol.
Your leash being longer than average doesn't remedy the fact that you're still tied to a pole...
Why? I've heard this for years at this point, but as someone who rarely uses snaps because they're the only convenient option for software I'm using, I'm generally ambivalent about them.
People seem to hold really strong opinions about snap but I've never been able to get a straight answer, just a bunch of hand waving.
My biggest hit was when they pushed browsers to snaps, and I couldn't do some of my school projects because my school stuff was on a separate disk that the snap was not allowed to access. (Had to use o365, and wasn't installing windows to write my papers)
The one app I can't stand as a snap is firefox, it took a minute to navigate to the first webpage every time I start up. The rest are or more less fine I think, but flatpak meets my needs for most other applications.
Also command line tools are terrible as snaps. And the worst part is you have no idea why they won't work. It doesn't tell you that snap is the problem. It just doesn't work.
It look me about two hours to realize that snap was the problem when I was trying to run Mastodon in a Docker container. That was the last straw before I moved to Fedora.
Snap can’t read anything outside of the /home directory, and there’s no way to fix that except changing the source code and recompiling it.
I didn't until apps started breaking. The snap version of steam, Firefox, and Unity (I think?) all started to have issues. When I googled around people would often ask "deb or snap"? I uninstalled the snap packages and installed the deb packages and most of my issues went away.
I ultimately switched to Linux Mint because I kept having stability issues and I was just desperate for a solution. But snap was not a great experience for me.
When Mozilla provide the firefox deb package - Why not give it then?
IMO snaps/flatpacks are slower to start, can't be updated while running, takes more diskspace, and takes longer time to update. With the isolation we also have different kind of problems - have you given it the correct permission?, and how do you get keepassxc browser extension to work with it(they dont support it)?
So, I used ubuntu for pretty close to 20 years and it was my go to distro. I have had hundreds upon hundreds of servers running ubuntu.
Last few years I've been moving away from ubuntu because of their lack of respect for their core users. They have no clear vision and when they do, its a magnificently shitty one like the donkey balls decision to enfrorce snap on everything.
I will still have some ubuntu servers to take care of, but every new server I set up will be fedora.
I hate having several package managers coexisting on my computer, and the only advantage of snap is that it solves a problem I've never encountered in 25 years.
Personally, I use Debian and gravitate towards flat paks, but I'm starting to question whether this is just one of those hills Linux users arbitrarily choose to die on a la systemd/wayland? I suppose one of the advantages of an opinionated OS is a vast array of opinions
Multiple standards are good, initially. Multiple visions and approaches can get tested. The best hopefully displaced the rest, whilst picking up all the other good ideas.
If there was only one standard we would get stuck with snaps with no alternatives.