216
submitted 8 months ago by Pantherina@feddit.de to c/linux@lemmy.ml

Appimages totally suck, because many developers think they were a real packaging format and support them exclusively.

Their use case is tiny, and in 99% of cases Flatpak is just better.

I could not find a single post or article about all the problems they have, so I wrote this.

This is not about shaming open source contributors. But Appimages are obviously broken, pretty badly maintained, while organizations/companies like Balena, Nextcloud etc. don't seem to get that.

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Jegahan@lemmy.ml 6 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

By the way, if you guys are interested here is a talk comparing Appimages Snaps and Flatpaks by Richard Brown, one the devs at Suse, a big contributer to openSuse and the guy who spearheaded the Desktop variante of MicroOS (the immutable openSuse Tumbleweed).

He isn't to keen on appimages either because of a miriad of technical issues.

[-] Pantherina@feddit.de 4 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

youtube.com/watch?v=4WuYGcs0t6I&t=456

For all the Grayjay/Newpipe/Freetube users

Very good video with additional points, will add them

[-] GlenTheFrog@lemmy.ml 6 points 8 months ago

Totally agree with basically every point here. You hit the nail on the head. App images are the .exe's of the Linux world and I don't understand how someone can say they love app images but hate Window's portable exe's. Even Windows doesn't have nearly as many portable executable as they once did. And when they do, most people (even those who prefer app images) prefer an exe with a Windows installer.

Anyways, this is all to point out why I avoid app images if at all possible

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 6 points 8 months ago

AppImages as a universal packaging format seem fun in that I've had loads of issues getting them to run properly on different systems. I'm sure they're handy for some stuff but haven't personally enjoyed them.

[-] atzanteol@sh.itjust.works 5 points 8 months ago

I'll be voted down but...

This is the shit you get from kids who grew up with "app stores."

load more comments (14 replies)
[-] oldfart@lemm.ee 4 points 8 months ago

Why do I hear the argument about no .desktop entries in every thread like this? Creating a .desktop file is a requirement for the appimage creation tools to work, and appimaged installs it in the system menu immediately. It's seamless.

[-] rotopenguin@infosec.pub 4 points 8 months ago

It would be nice if there was a way to bundle up a flatpak that was at risk of disappearing

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] MonkderZweite@feddit.ch 4 points 8 months ago

Does flatpack finally let me choose an alternative to ~/.var?

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 4 points 8 months ago

flatpak?

Frying pan, meet fire.

[-] delirious_owl@discuss.online 4 points 8 months ago

AppImages can be signed. Flat pak is the lesser option for security

[-] Pantherina@feddit.de 4 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Explained in a other comment how a pain it is to verify such a signature.

Is that stored in the appimage file?

I find it funny how flatpak neglectors always spell it wrong

[-] MonkderZweite@feddit.ch 3 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Needed to have zulip to talk about a bug, the AUR package was a pain to debug, the appimage in ~/.local/bin just works™.

[-] delirious_owl@discuss.online 3 points 8 months ago

Feather Wallet is a great example of AppImages done right

[-] tigerjerusalem@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Appimages are awesome for the regular user. Single file, just double click to run anywhere. Snap and Flatpak should die a quick death and all the work should be used to improve Appimages. There's no other concept for the end user as simple and clear as this.

[-] iopq@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago

I double clicked, the program didn't run because it's missing some dependencies

[-] Yubishi@lemmy.one 4 points 8 months ago

They mimic the apple application format to some degree and it is a great way to distribute. The real detriment is sandboxing but with more support this could be included.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›
this post was submitted on 04 Mar 2024
216 points (80.7% liked)

Linux

48007 readers
890 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS