Originally posted by r_a_trip
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Playing Around With Ubuntu's Snaps, On Fedora
Collapse
X
-
- Likes 2
-
Originally posted by pythoneer View Post
What does the actual size of an application has to do with my example, that was an example. It still holds that snaps are using significantly more space than Flatpaks. And what does the time when the updates are fetches has to do with the downloaded size and the overall update time? 16.5 Gb are 16.5 Gb regardless if all packages are updated now or further apart it adds up to 16.5 Gb and 7 x more time to wait for it to finish. Regardless when exactly they are updated or not. Every point still holds.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by pythoneer View Post
But why not using Flatpak. It has all the same properties and adding smaller file size and more security, easier update of significant librarys the application is using preventing security holes being unfixed.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cerberus View Post
It does hold if you twist words, when you download daily updates you wont see a huge increase in download size, overall size is not important, we arent on limited bandwidths anymore, so why should I care if I download additional gigabytes in a certain period? What users dont want is downloading much more every day when they update, and that would not happen because applications are not updated at the same time. Daily size is not much bigger, that is the only thing users might care about, and even that only if they are on slow connections. It is not like users stare at the monitor while updates are downloading, doing absolutely nothing.They do other things unless you are the type that likes staring at the updating process and not doing anything else while it is downloading, 99% of users dont do that, they surf the Internet, chat on Skype, listen to music etc.
- Likes 5
Comment
-
Originally posted by pythoneer View Post
But why not using Flatpak. It has all the same properties and adding smaller file size and more security, easier update of significant librarys the application is using preventing security holes being unfixed.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by pythoneer View Post
Lets say you have 15 of this Applications installed and want to update them. You can go with 16.5 Gb of update size or 2.3 Gb and please don't say download sizes doesn't matter ... i don't want to wait 7 times longer for my updates to finish downloading. So when you have Flatpak as alternative that has smaller file sizes and is more secure, why choose snap over Flatpak?
Comment
-
I don't care about wayland, I don't care about mir, I don't care about those so-called "security issues" when snap is running on X11, I think whining about package sizes is dumb and whining about how it's harder to keep systems updated with the latest libraries is dumber. I care about getting my application in the hands of users. Michael Hall created a snapcraft file for Krita in his spare time, with two or three iterations it worked, and all I as an application author has to do is run the script and upload the result to the app store. And now the result runs in lots of other distributions! Magic! I'm very happy -- though the official way of distributing Krita for Linux will remain appimages.
- Likes 4
Comment
-
Originally posted by pythoneer View Post
Ok i see. Snap is only for US citizens because US citizens are not limited by bandwidths. But i'll guess other people (95% of the world population) is seeing this differently. I live in Germany and people have bandwidth limitations. Throughput and/or max num of Gb per month. I am not one of them but they exist. Daily size is much bigger and while you are updating significantly more data, your awesome Youtube session or skype can be disrupted. Sry but i can't really understand how anyone cannot not see the disadvantage in this.
Comment
-
Some form of QoS or throttling for downloads would be nice to have. Its fine to download more as long as it doesn't interrupt what you are doing. Some of us like to play video games online with as low latency as possible. (Faster internet isn't always the answer, large parts of usa cant get over 1-4mb if they can get it at all. And satellite sucks.)Last edited by DIRT; 15 June 2016, 11:15 AM.
Comment
Comment