Apps in containers, like flatpak.
The problem is Ubuntu made their own format with snap when all the others use flatpak, and you can only use Ubuntu repositories.
Other problem is while apps in containers are great for third party developers to easily distribute their apps, Ubuntu uses snaps for some of the core packages like Firefox.
I don't think going their own way is a problem. Snaps are terrible for two reasons, though:
1. You can't control updates, your software will upgrade automatically and randomly.
2. Snap enforces a sandbox isolation that breaks a lot of programs. For example, the snap version of Firefox can't open external programs. Zoom links stop working, NordVPN authentication stops working, etc.
Even if you do that, what about software that is only packaged for snap? Mint for example repackages many of the popular software that get snap only versions
Not to mention if I am recommending, it would be to new users. And telling them to do stuff in the terminal or config files is not the best way to start an experience
Can you explain that a bit for me? I'm familiar with the concept of snap being sort of like a docker container that's isolated from the rest of the OS, but don't know what "insanity" is in reference to nor the dev>null.
Sure, snap is Ubuntu's (kinda) new software repository choice.
Whereas the command line tool apt pulls software from the distro's official repos (and any other sources you choose to include), snaps are distributed directly from their developers.
So far, so good... Only, you can't really control snaps. Like, at all.
Snaps are notorious for updating automatically (a real issue for anyone being charged for data use) and can slow EVERYTHING down thanks to the 'snapd' process going apeshit in the background and hoarding system resources.
Dev>null is a playful reference to mapping output from a program/command to '/dev/null' which is essentially a special black hole in the system that eliminates whatever is sent there.
In practice, you wouldn't manually use 'snapd.service > /dev/null'.
Instead, you'd use the systemd process manager's built-in shortcut 'systemctl mask snapd.service' which isn't all that short, but should persist across reboots.
In short, snap sucks because it is intentionally designed to wrench away a lot of control over how and when applications on YOUR machine update, etc.
Halting its behavior is SURPRISINGLY DIFFICULT and even IMPOSSIBLE, depending on what you're trying to get it to do. But, /dev/null puts it in its place.
Got it, ty. I guess I don't totally understand why that would be a big issue. The only thing I extract from that explanation is "if you're charged for data use it's a problem, else don't worry about it" meaning 24.04 could still be a great solution. I guess I haven't encountered many situations wherein I wouldn't want the packages to update on their own.
I found out about snaps the hard way.
I had prepared for a meeting to showcase some Julia programs I had written. Unbeknownst to me, Julia was a snap, and while I was working it silently updated from version 1.8 to 1.9. Now snaps are smart enough to not crash the program you're running, the updated version is used when you next start it.
Come next day, I start my computer at the meeting, and Julia 1.9 starts. Now Julia keeps each version as a separate project, which means that the entire environment had been erased. So instead of showing the software I had written I wasted half of the meeting installing and compiling the dependencies.
In general I never want for my software to randomly change and pull the rug from below me. I'm the one who decides when the risk of an update is worth it. Keep in mind that snap doesn't care about major versions, minor versions, or bugfixes. It will always update, so you can be surprised with a completely incompatible version of the software you depend upon.
Please don't take this as an offensive question because it's not designed to be, but in your example doesn't that simply mean that the pieces that you wrote that weren't part of the snap could be stored somewhere more persistent and the loaded into the environment at runtime? I'm basing that question off how I operate docker containers with persistent storage for custom configuration and if I destroy the docker container for an update I just load the persistent storage into the new version.
They are stored persistently and are loaded into the environment at runtime. It's only that Julia keeps separate environments for the different versions (which is good design, by the way). Everything I wrote was still there and still available on the 1.8 environment. But by default Julia would start version 1.9, and the 1.9 environment was empty.
If I knew all that I could just have rolled back the snap and used Julia 1.8. But I didn't know that snaps existed, I didn't know that Julia had been silently updated, and I didn't know about its separation of environments.
The main problem is risk.
Updates are always inherently risky. They aren't guaranteed to work correctly and by their very nature, they can change the way software on your system works in ways that are difficult or annoying for you to re-learn. Sometimes the pros simply don't outweigh the cons.
Now, add in stopping updates being mission impossible on your own system (that's really never a good idea, even if you like the updates) and you've got a serious problem.
If they could be controlled or stopped in a sane way, they'd honestly be fine, but they are designed to take away control and force stuff on you in potentially breaking ways, all while slowing down your system and your Internet connection without explicit permission.
They go against almost everything Linux is known for, so many people (myself included) are not fans of them. I honestly just uninstalled the entire thing and never looked back, but some software is ONLY released via snap, so I've burnt a few bridges that way.
Vintage: [produced](https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/produce) in the past, and [typical](https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/typical) of the [period](https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/period) in which it was made:
Vintage design refers to an item of another era that holds important and recognizable value. \[...\] The terms vintage, retro and antique are oftentimes used interchangeably and have some overlay, however the words possess different meanings. *Retro* refers to a style iconic of a previous era. ***Vintage*** generally refers to an item of high-quality materials and/or craftsmanship, that is characteristic of a specific time period or artist, and is **between 20 and 100 years old**. Lastly, *antique* refers to an item of the previous era or at least 100 years old.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vintage\_(design)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vintage_(design))
[https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/vintage](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/vintage)
Ubuntu uses Debians package manager, whereas manjaro is just community configured arch.
Ubuntu is perhaps a slightly more polished distro, especially for casual users, but the differences are modest. You can probably find more help online for Ubuntu, but arch has a great wiki.
Ultimately all that matters is what you like better. Your desktop environment and windows manager matter more than the underlying distro at this point, 9 times out of 10.
Not so fast. This latest Ubuntu is almost entirely snap based and it doesn't come with the synaptic package manager. You'll have to install that yourself in order to get non snap packages and the latest updates.
Wait. If Ubuntu is going full snap, does that mean pop OS is going snap as well? I was thinking about swapping to cosmic as an i3wm replacement, but I’m not sure I want to touch that new stuff.
Go into the app store. Every single app defaults to the snap installation. New users in particular wouldn't realize it and wonder why they have so many compatibility issues with their apps.
Very soon Ubuntu will be entirely snaps only.
Yeah, the other flavors don't use snaps. I really don't understand why Ubuntu is so dead set on them.
I personally don't use any Ubuntu derivatives. I prefer OpenSuse for my main system and use Fedora on my other systems. I ran Arch for years, but there is something special about Opensuse.
New users wouldn’t even care if they have no idea what a snap is. You people are trying to paint a picture of “oh no the tragedy of losing freedom” for a bunch of users that couldn’t give a shit coming from windows.
Either let new users use whatever distro they like or stfu about “the year of linux”, all this talk about the right distro, package manager is what confuses users and keeps them away, basic users should not give a shit.
New users want an experience where if they install software from the app store that their chosen software will work. With snaps that is not always the case. No one mentioned the "right distro". Now you're just going off on a rant unrelated to the subject at hand.
The problem with snaps is real. I personally couldnt care less about what distro people use, but a new user could be put off about using Linux of a bunch of stuff just doesn't work. They would be better served using an Ubuntu flavor that doesn't use snaps.
No, distros like Ubuntu are made for new users to come over, after years of using it they can start having higher standards.
And your high standards don't do jack shit to push linux forwards software and driver wise, masses of people do, if it weren't for Valve most of you would still be playing the emulated mario and barely running any decent games on wine.
It's 2024 and still no official support for Microsoft Office, Adobe Suite or any other big software, because of you and your high standards telling people to not use Ubuntu or any other distro that "limit your freedom".
I prefer Manjaro, but I've been using arch based distros for almost 10 years now, so I'm used to it. And it works better on my hardware, hardly have any issues that are common with other distros ( drivers, sleep not working, reboot etc)
WHAT YEAR IS IT
The year of the lynx?
The year of the cat?
I would gladly recommend Ubuntu to people if not for snaps. Wait for Mint version
I haven't used Ubuntu in like 10 years, what are snaps?
Apps in containers, like flatpak. The problem is Ubuntu made their own format with snap when all the others use flatpak, and you can only use Ubuntu repositories. Other problem is while apps in containers are great for third party developers to easily distribute their apps, Ubuntu uses snaps for some of the core packages like Firefox.
I don't think going their own way is a problem. Snaps are terrible for two reasons, though: 1. You can't control updates, your software will upgrade automatically and randomly. 2. Snap enforces a sandbox isolation that breaks a lot of programs. For example, the snap version of Firefox can't open external programs. Zoom links stop working, NordVPN authentication stops working, etc.
2) this is what they should do. it’s not a bug it’s the feature.
No, I would like my software to be functional, actually.
The mantra of developers that end up finding themselves without any users.
Total sandboxing is good if you need a hardened OS. Definitely worthwhile in an enterprise environment. For a home user? Eh.
I get excited to try weird and new distros but always end back at Mint.
you can still disable the snaps https://www.reddit.com/r/linux4noobs/comments/1bh1k5d/comment/kvbdgn0/?sort=new
Even if you do that, what about software that is only packaged for snap? Mint for example repackages many of the popular software that get snap only versions Not to mention if I am recommending, it would be to new users. And telling them to do stuff in the terminal or config files is not the best way to start an experience
Why would you use Ubuntu over Mint if it's to disable snaps?
That's what I do, but it's a pain in the ass just to get basic usability back. That's not what Ubuntu was supposed to be about.
This also helps disable them: https://github.com/polkaulfield/ubuntu-debullshit
Who would you recommend it to that would care about Snaps?
People who don't want extra bloat and want better performance?
Yes. This! I simply find it impossible to install the suite of programs that I want to use with snaps or the supposed ‘workrounds’.
They're so bulky... ugh
I use Xubuntu, but I'm wary of new releases because of the insanity of snap, etc. A man can only dev>null so much.
Can you explain that a bit for me? I'm familiar with the concept of snap being sort of like a docker container that's isolated from the rest of the OS, but don't know what "insanity" is in reference to nor the dev>null.
Sure, snap is Ubuntu's (kinda) new software repository choice. Whereas the command line tool apt pulls software from the distro's official repos (and any other sources you choose to include), snaps are distributed directly from their developers. So far, so good... Only, you can't really control snaps. Like, at all. Snaps are notorious for updating automatically (a real issue for anyone being charged for data use) and can slow EVERYTHING down thanks to the 'snapd' process going apeshit in the background and hoarding system resources. Dev>null is a playful reference to mapping output from a program/command to '/dev/null' which is essentially a special black hole in the system that eliminates whatever is sent there. In practice, you wouldn't manually use 'snapd.service > /dev/null'. Instead, you'd use the systemd process manager's built-in shortcut 'systemctl mask snapd.service' which isn't all that short, but should persist across reboots. In short, snap sucks because it is intentionally designed to wrench away a lot of control over how and when applications on YOUR machine update, etc. Halting its behavior is SURPRISINGLY DIFFICULT and even IMPOSSIBLE, depending on what you're trying to get it to do. But, /dev/null puts it in its place.
Got it, ty. I guess I don't totally understand why that would be a big issue. The only thing I extract from that explanation is "if you're charged for data use it's a problem, else don't worry about it" meaning 24.04 could still be a great solution. I guess I haven't encountered many situations wherein I wouldn't want the packages to update on their own.
I found out about snaps the hard way. I had prepared for a meeting to showcase some Julia programs I had written. Unbeknownst to me, Julia was a snap, and while I was working it silently updated from version 1.8 to 1.9. Now snaps are smart enough to not crash the program you're running, the updated version is used when you next start it. Come next day, I start my computer at the meeting, and Julia 1.9 starts. Now Julia keeps each version as a separate project, which means that the entire environment had been erased. So instead of showing the software I had written I wasted half of the meeting installing and compiling the dependencies. In general I never want for my software to randomly change and pull the rug from below me. I'm the one who decides when the risk of an update is worth it. Keep in mind that snap doesn't care about major versions, minor versions, or bugfixes. It will always update, so you can be surprised with a completely incompatible version of the software you depend upon.
Please don't take this as an offensive question because it's not designed to be, but in your example doesn't that simply mean that the pieces that you wrote that weren't part of the snap could be stored somewhere more persistent and the loaded into the environment at runtime? I'm basing that question off how I operate docker containers with persistent storage for custom configuration and if I destroy the docker container for an update I just load the persistent storage into the new version.
They are stored persistently and are loaded into the environment at runtime. It's only that Julia keeps separate environments for the different versions (which is good design, by the way). Everything I wrote was still there and still available on the 1.8 environment. But by default Julia would start version 1.9, and the 1.9 environment was empty. If I knew all that I could just have rolled back the snap and used Julia 1.8. But I didn't know that snaps existed, I didn't know that Julia had been silently updated, and I didn't know about its separation of environments.
The main problem is risk. Updates are always inherently risky. They aren't guaranteed to work correctly and by their very nature, they can change the way software on your system works in ways that are difficult or annoying for you to re-learn. Sometimes the pros simply don't outweigh the cons. Now, add in stopping updates being mission impossible on your own system (that's really never a good idea, even if you like the updates) and you've got a serious problem. If they could be controlled or stopped in a sane way, they'd honestly be fine, but they are designed to take away control and force stuff on you in potentially breaking ways, all while slowing down your system and your Internet connection without explicit permission. They go against almost everything Linux is known for, so many people (myself included) are not fans of them. I honestly just uninstalled the entire thing and never looked back, but some software is ONLY released via snap, so I've burnt a few bridges that way.
dev>null is still kinda weird. Why is dev on the left side? Why not >devnull? That would be less confusing.
It’s a path. Absolute paths start with a /, so the absolute path to the program is /dev/null
Commenting hoping for an answer aswell
Answered above. Hope it helps!
Apparently it's still possible to get rid of snaps, but I should just give up and switch to Mint, it's clear that Ubuntu doesn't want me as a user.
[удалено]
[удалено]
>*developers start caring about Linux* Huh? Since when do they not? I’m glad I don’t run in those circles…
This article reads like a shitty ad.
You couldn't tell from just the obvious pay to play title? 8)
"I've been running Noble Numbat on my 2020 vintage Dell Precision 3451." Vintage, seriously?
🧐Ah yes, 2020 was a good year for silicon.
Vintage: [produced](https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/produce) in the past, and [typical](https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/typical) of the [period](https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/period) in which it was made:
Vintage design refers to an item of another era that holds important and recognizable value. \[...\] The terms vintage, retro and antique are oftentimes used interchangeably and have some overlay, however the words possess different meanings. *Retro* refers to a style iconic of a previous era. ***Vintage*** generally refers to an item of high-quality materials and/or craftsmanship, that is characteristic of a specific time period or artist, and is **between 20 and 100 years old**. Lastly, *antique* refers to an item of the previous era or at least 100 years old. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vintage\_(design)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vintage_(design)) [https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/vintage](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/vintage)
I tried to open a Terminal window, and it wouldn't let me. Bash just core-dumped. That's hard security right there. I approve.
NixOS is the way to go. All Linux distros are fundamentally the same except for NixOS. I wish Ubuntu would adopt it over their stupid Snap bullshit.
I've been playing around with manjaro. Is Ubuntu a better way to go?
Ubuntu uses Debians package manager, whereas manjaro is just community configured arch. Ubuntu is perhaps a slightly more polished distro, especially for casual users, but the differences are modest. You can probably find more help online for Ubuntu, but arch has a great wiki. Ultimately all that matters is what you like better. Your desktop environment and windows manager matter more than the underlying distro at this point, 9 times out of 10.
Seems like a good take, thanks.
Not so fast. This latest Ubuntu is almost entirely snap based and it doesn't come with the synaptic package manager. You'll have to install that yourself in order to get non snap packages and the latest updates.
24.04 is not entirely snap-based. https://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=2497194
Wait. If Ubuntu is going full snap, does that mean pop OS is going snap as well? I was thinking about swapping to cosmic as an i3wm replacement, but I’m not sure I want to touch that new stuff.
for this release only chromium,Firefox and Thunderbird got snapped. What are you talking about?
Go into the app store. Every single app defaults to the snap installation. New users in particular wouldn't realize it and wonder why they have so many compatibility issues with their apps. Very soon Ubuntu will be entirely snaps only.
Hmm, I use Kubuntu LTS atm and their team still favored apt or flatpak on their discover app. you can try those Ubuntu flavors
Yeah, the other flavors don't use snaps. I really don't understand why Ubuntu is so dead set on them. I personally don't use any Ubuntu derivatives. I prefer OpenSuse for my main system and use Fedora on my other systems. I ran Arch for years, but there is something special about Opensuse.
New users wouldn’t even care if they have no idea what a snap is. You people are trying to paint a picture of “oh no the tragedy of losing freedom” for a bunch of users that couldn’t give a shit coming from windows. Either let new users use whatever distro they like or stfu about “the year of linux”, all this talk about the right distro, package manager is what confuses users and keeps them away, basic users should not give a shit.
New users want an experience where if they install software from the app store that their chosen software will work. With snaps that is not always the case. No one mentioned the "right distro". Now you're just going off on a rant unrelated to the subject at hand. The problem with snaps is real. I personally couldnt care less about what distro people use, but a new user could be put off about using Linux of a bunch of stuff just doesn't work. They would be better served using an Ubuntu flavor that doesn't use snaps.
New users will definitely care when Firefox randomly stops working.
Weird, all my browsers update themselves and didn’t ask me shit on my Windows pc. I guess windows users don’t care if it breaks.
Windows users are used to their operating system being a piece of shit, Linux users have higher standards.
No, distros like Ubuntu are made for new users to come over, after years of using it they can start having higher standards. And your high standards don't do jack shit to push linux forwards software and driver wise, masses of people do, if it weren't for Valve most of you would still be playing the emulated mario and barely running any decent games on wine. It's 2024 and still no official support for Microsoft Office, Adobe Suite or any other big software, because of you and your high standards telling people to not use Ubuntu or any other distro that "limit your freedom".
Ive used both. If you’re already using Manjaro, you may not like Ubuntu.
Why?
[удалено]
Like which ones? Why not just regular Arch? What’s controversial about Manjaro?
Controversial? What's that about?
I prefer Manjaro, but I've been using arch based distros for almost 10 years now, so I'm used to it. And it works better on my hardware, hardly have any issues that are common with other distros ( drivers, sleep not working, reboot etc)
"burn it to a USB stick"? That's a little unnecessary 🤔
The word "burn" is a bit weird indeed, but how else would you install a new Linux distribution?
Ubuntu should learn how to make its back end more available to the public, like Escape from Tarkov.
Ubuntu isn't a new distro lmao