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.

  • 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.