And Chromium? Did they request it?
Honestly not sure. Browsers prefer them because they are quicker to update than Debs. (and easier to maintain)
Installing Chromium through apt will install a Snap? This would be the first I have heard of this.
As I do know how and do update .deb packages, if I tell you that it is very easy to do and very easy to maintain, what would you think of it?
These .deb packages did not build themselves:
Flatpak + Snap is a lot easier than maintaining a version for every distro variant.
What makes it easier? What about the process eases things?
Upon Googling I am not finding anything about Chromium being installed as a Snap while using apt. Do you have any information on this?
I just tried a google search and this was my very first hit:
In a perfect world all developers would need to do is maintain a Snap and Flatpak version of their application and cover every distro. It also ensures that users are on the latest versions to keep them protected.
I understand you think differently but that is the line of thinking here.
1 Like
Especially in FOSS, I don't think there must be any hiding.
Out of curosity what did you search? I did not find any but maybe I worded poorly.
Also is there more than stray cases?
According to someone in the link Chromium is not packaged as a Deb anymore. I am unsure about that as I have not messed with it in ages
Yes, except that the process of creating the .deb is not really different from other packaging. And... You can convert between them. For example, using alien, you can convert .deb to .rpm and the other way around.
Browsers do have something that appeals to them with Snap and Flatpak, both: That both are sandboxed. This means that the Browser developers get something that they really want: Preservation of their control over the browsers appearance - a.k.a Brand Image.
This very thing is what led them to write an Open Letter to Distro makers:
alien is far from foolproof though.
This is probably very true.
Personally I want my browser to follow my system theme for sure. But I know there has been a lot of arguements about this from Browser developers
What?
omg...
It has honestly been a long time since I messed around with it. But 4 or 5 years ago it always gave me fits.
Anyway I am probably about to get off for now as I feel you tire of our debate. Just for the record I am not trying to tell you how to feel but expressing how I feel. I just feel that Canonical deserves more credit after throwing hundreds of millions of dollars into the ecosystem even if they do have some missteps.
But anyway you have a good night.
That said, we have no choice in smartphones.
Fair enough, although I expect music in a concert the same way I expect transparency on an open source project.
What I'm trying to say is that there are things that while not strictly forbidden are just in bad faith. There's a reason why companies are increasingly being obligated to make things like privacy notices prominent, as opposed to just continue to use the fine print or other dark patterns to justify shifting the responsibility onto their customers.
Continuing with the example of Canonical and the search bar scandal, right after they "got caught" they added a legal notice so that users could be aware of what was being done. Except they placed it on the opposite corner where the search bar was, as far as possible from where the user interaction was happening and where it was more likely to go unnoticed.
So, while technically they were in compliance from a legal standpoint, it's undeniable the fact they were trying to hide their intentions as much as possible. A dark pattern.
This isn't me picking on Canonical or Ubuntu, it's just the example I was using earlier. But in any case I don't think company size, revenue, etc., is a valid excuse for this behavior.
PS: Too many posts since I last logged to go over right now.
2 Likes
We talking about some big a companies.
What about very good programmers what can creating a very smoothly a stable and fast distributions?
Isn't the example a brothers Zorin?
What about programmers what working on they distributions 30 years or more example slackware and gentoo. They have all details in they handbook. Everything is described. Did they trying push a people what we want. No for me they are mostly GNU ideas. Free for all.
Debian someone wrote before @Aravisian - the big screaming they forward to systemd like 90% distributions.
Well that is normal sometimes if something changing in the world people screaming, because need again learning new things.
The people are lazy this days and waiting when some IA or some vacum robot cleaning them house etc. What I remember in history, technology always killed civilization.
The main difference is Apple doesnât collect as much and Apple uses our data for their own purposes. They donât redistribute it everywhere like Google does.
But your point still stands. There is no perfect option.
I do not really disagree with anything you said there.
I am just trying to bring to light to Canonical has a lot more pressures on them than say ZorinGroup and that has caused Canonical to not be perfect sometimes. 135 millionish dollars per year in bills will do that lol.
1 Like
Zorin brothers could not do what they do without Canonicalâs contributions. (At least not at the same quality)
But yes, the Zorin brothers are exceptional. I have no doubt they are extremely talented, hard working developers. Though their agenda like Canonical is to sell a premium product to those who need/want it. Money tends to bring out the best talent.