• Domi@lemmy.secnd.me
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    9 months ago

    The architecture is literally better than Flatpak

    Why?

    I don’t understand why people are so hell bent on hating Snaps.

    Every single time I tried snaps in the last years I had a bad time. Either they were slow to start, refused to work (Docker snap) or made my machine boot significantly slower. Granted, I haven’t bothered in a year or so.

    At this point they just released unfinished software that was not ready for production, forced it onto people and are surprised when everybody remembers snap as being partially closed source, slow and unreliable. Even if it’s not now, that’s how the first impression was and it’s going to stick forever.

    • AMDIsOurLord
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      9 months ago

      Refer to an earlier post on the downsides of flatpak, Snap basically doesn’t have a lot of those issues other than the fundamental ones regarding a canonical far package

      You may have used Snaps when they used XZ compression. XZ is a stellar compressor, but for static data. It compresses better at the cost of being slower, nowadays Snaps use fast algorithms tuned for faster decompression, so it starts a lot faster.