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.

  • FooBarrington@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    I get that multiple package managers can be suboptimal (though I don’t have a problem with it as long as the integration is good).

    But it still seems like a much, much better solution than just not having these applications managed by a package manager, as is the case with AppImages.

    • onlooker
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      9 months ago

      True. I would consider another package manager if it integrated into my system nicely and if I had more than a few applications outside my regular package manager. But I only have like two AppImages on my PC anyway, so I don’t mind updating them manually when I need to run them.

      • FooBarrington@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        9 months ago

        That is the case for me with Flatpaks. They integrate really well into Fedora Kinoite - you have OS updates and Flatpaks all in a central UI, everything works as expected from any “App Store”.