Quoting: Purple Library GuyAs a side note, why does he even know how many people are downloading PPAs from outside Ubuntu?

It's explained in the video (and, y'know, the transcript that I provided) PPAs are hosted on Launchpad, so they know which ones get the most traffic. People other than Ubuntu could have their own Launchpad instance, since they open sourced it, but no one does. They don't know who is using the PPA (again, as it says in the transcript) but they know how many.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

You're right, of course. "a backdoor by connecting your computer to the Ubuntu Store," "back-room shenanigans [between] Canonical and Microsoft," and "filthy bloatware" represent exactly the calm and objective assessment, entirely on the merits, of a new packaging format. That's sure to have people lining up to join our community and have companies taking us seriously.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: TuxeeFunny. So Snaps are the new systemd. Something one can complain about endlessly, bolstered quite frequently by unfound "facts".

Regardless of the merits or otherwise of any given change, people frothing themselves up because of something they read on reddit or heard on YouTube is really self-destructive. Desktop Linux, and Linux gaming in particular, has enough stacked against us without people getting distracted by apocalypse du jour. It's all just nonsense, but people like being outraged.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: NanobangNONE of the snaps I've installed can even see my data partition exists, let alone access it.

https://snapcraft.io/docs/removable-media-interface [External Link]

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: PatolaYes. The granularity/heterogenity of PPAs is commonly poised as a disadvantage, but here they are an advantage, because you can disable/enable the sources individually. You have granular control in who you decide to trust.

It's interesting. I asked for some statistics recently from our IS people, and they didn't give me anything other than number of hits over a period of time on a PPA. I can't get any detail about where those people are, who they are, or anything like that, all I know is relatively which are the most popular PPAs and interestingly there are a large number of people who have a PPA - and I'm not going to tell you which one it is - but there is a PPA in Launchpad that is more popular - popular in terms of number of people who hit it every day - and that PPA is empty. It has nothing in it. But it's because people read documents and blog posts and instructions that say, "this is how you get that thing. You add this PPA," and so people just blindly do it, right? And so there are people out there who will blindly follow instructions, even if they are patently wrong they will still do it. And so the Number One most-hit PPA is not providing any value to any user at all, because it doesn't have anything in it. There are no packages in it. It used to but it doesn't any more. It's a problem that people wanted solving and somebody solved it by creating a PPA but subsequently deleted the stuff from that PPA. And none of those users probably even know that that PPA is empty and they probably don't even know that they're no longer getting updates for that piece of software.

(Edit: the transcript is in the "long quote" so I'll repeat the key point: the Number One most-hit PPA is not providing any value to any user at all, because it doesn't have anything in it.)

From the video I linked to earlier. Of course, rather than simply not having anything in, the PPA could put something else there, like the infamous case where someone changed the wallpaper [External Link] of everyone that was hammering their home machine because some instructions somewhere said that people should get software from there.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: scaineIt should be, but this is all about money.

It is, but not really for the reasons you're thinking of. A tiny indie developer benefits more than a massive AAA developer does from all the infrastructure that Steam provides. A big multiplat release is going to have their own matchmaking, their own support chain, their own marketing, their own forums, and so on, outside of Steam, so there's less of a value proposition for Valve's cut than is the case for the indie, and supporting a million players in one container is cheaper for Valve than a thousand containers with a thousand players in, so there's scope to lower the rates.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: GuestMy main grip with snap was when it installed chromium on my Kubuntu 19.10 it was slower to start. Even with a SSD.

Yep. First run startup of a graphical application is slow. It needs to set up an entire environment of all the things that the application expects to be there to keep it isolated from the actual environment.

The other big one is that, because the application is sandboxed and the default permissions are quite conservative, users don't have access to the files that they expect to from within a snap application.

Also i do not get The point of snaps and flatpacks for open-source software well integrated in the distro. They are maybe less up-to-date but they take less disk space.

For normally-supported stuff, don't use snaps. Just use your normal package manager and get normal package manager updates.

But people want new stuff, even new open source stuff. Containerised applications are much better, and much more discoverable, than plonking on some PPA.

For commercial software that is compiled once and not updated i understand better.

This is the big win. Users can find commercial software in the same place that they find open source software, and it all gets updated the same, without developers having to worry about fragmentation or library incompatibilities, or any of the other things that might scare them away.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Guestyou're allowing a third party to have total access to your system even if you're using them from Mint, Fedora, Manjaro... they're a big security risk.

As opposed to PPAs?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: GBeeMaybe I need more coffee, but I've no clue what "Snaps are more locked-down as they compared it to using proprietary software, it pushes Ubuntu directly and Snaps are done in the background." means?

Perhaps I should read the original for elucidation. The above explanation has severely confused me :(

It's Liam's summary of Mint's position, but it's hard to make it clear because Mint's position is just argle bargle.

In Ubuntu chromium is distributed (by default - you can still use a PPA) as a snap, for the reasons Liam linked to. Snaps have a central repository that Canonical pays for and maintains, for the reasons listed in the video I linked to, but other developers can put their stuff on there (other developers putting their stuff on there is kinda the point).

These things have made the Mint people Very Angry.

There are issues with snaps, but they aren't the ones that people get Very Angry about.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

It's worth people watching this video [External Link] - part of a much longer interview [External Link] - so that they're informed about snaps.

View this comment - View article - View full comments