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.

  • brax
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    I hate them both, give me a .Deb (or equivalent) if you’re gonna package it. And get off my lawn! 🤣

    • Pantherina@feddit.deOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      9 months ago

      Installing .deb files from random sources is also very insecure and not reliable for updates.

      • brax
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        9 months ago

        Less secure than blindly installing flatpaks or appimages?

        • Pantherina@feddit.deOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          9 months ago

          Appimages work “everywhere” so they are better for distributing malware.

          Flatpaks are normally not installed from random sources and I hope it stays like that.

          So yes and no.

            • Pantherina@feddit.deOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              9 months ago

              Not yet.

              The permissions are too comlicated (unlike “allow documents access” on Mac for example)

              And there is no Desktop GUI integration for opt-in to permissions. So install, open Flatseal / KDEs settings, harden, then run.