"Flatpak Is Not the Future"

[rambo919]

The ONLY place for flatpak I can see is proprietary software where appimage can sometimes be superior depending on the product.

FWIW, that is the statement I agree with --- even if a valued third-party commercial developer that went of of its way to also provide a native version for the specific distribution and version thereof that I'd be using that particular fortnight would still have a leg up (if I'd not trust them I'd not use their software, period).

Something like flatpak could be useful for open software, but that would require dependency framework bundles like what windows has. It is utterly insane to have a whole 3+GB DE as a dependency when all you actually use is 1% of it.

[rambo919]

So, there's three issues I personally see with containerization, all of which I feel could be resolved:

1. How can we trust binaries provided from some random source?
2. They need to be able to work with attached peripherals (for example, Scribus as an AppImage doesn't seem able to see installed printers)
3. Desktop Environment integration: there's gotta be a way not to have to bundle the damn DE with the program

The problem as I see it.... the old way of doing linux has become unintentionally bloated due to the chaos of everyone does his own thing.

The linux ecosystem is simply put a mess filled with extreme individualists with severe trust issues and elitism.

..... and I can see no easy fix for it other than a wealthy but trusted patron that starts a new organization that does a kind of reorganization and opens a third way up for users so to speak. Shake up the market as it were. Shuttleworth did something like this but fatigue seems to have set in and he essentially abandoned the project which looks like it's slowly dying from inertia, it feels like Ubuntu is simply a half done project where the leads became disillusioned with their initial optimism.

[rene]

..... and I can see no easy fix for it other than a wealthy but trusted patron that starts a new organization that does a kind of reorganization and opens a third way up for users so to speak. Shake up the market as it were. Shuttleworth did something like this but fatigue seems to have set in and he essentially abandoned the project which looks like it's slowly dying from inertia, it feels like Ubuntu is simply a half done project where the leads became disillusioned with their initial optimism.

QFT for all of that, but also so as to remark that I doubt that any such patron will be here before Linux itself has died (right alongside the x86 architecture) in anything but the (internet-) server sphere.

[MurphCID]

I've never really thought about file sizes for Flatpak installs, it is just not something I have ever considered. Maybe that is my Windows legacy or something. If all the dependencies are met, for me anyway, I don't care about how big the file is as long as it works. I remember dependency hell from the bad old days of Linux.

It's much more noticeable on low capacity drives or slow internet. If you have large/fast of both you won't necessarily mind that a 2mb program requires a 5GB download.

Very true. I still think we need to settle on a standard or two standards (not SNAP IMHO).

[MurphCID]

So, there's three issues I personally see with containerization, all of which I feel could be resolved:

1. How can we trust binaries provided from some random source?
2. They need to be able to work with attached peripherals (for example, Scribus as an AppImage doesn't seem able to see installed printers)
3. Desktop Environment integration: there's gotta be a way not to have to bundle the damn DE with the program

The problem as I see it.... the old way of doing linux has become unintentionally bloated due to the chaos of everyone does his own thing.

The linux ecosystem is simply put a mess filled with extreme individualists with severe trust issues and elitism.

..... and I can see no easy fix for it other than a wealthy but trusted patron that starts a new organization that does a kind of reorganization and opens a third way up for users so to speak. Shake up the market as it were. Shuttleworth did something like this but fatigue seems to have set in and he essentially abandoned the project which looks like it's slowly dying from inertia, it feels like Ubuntu is simply a half done project where the leads became disillusioned with their initial optimism.

I agree, Ubuntu seems to have lost its way, but I thought that it has issues after it added the Amazon spyware to their desktop....

[Aztaroth]

A very interesting article and interesting remarks in this thread about the Linux model or the Flatpak model. As they were made by people who know much more than me, I won't add anything to it.
However, I feel something is missing and it's merely about the component sitting on the chair.

In the consumerist model we're living in, social rank is mostly preserved by having the last out of a "thing", which is supposed to be better (for whom ? - for the company it's obvious unless nobody will buy it, for the consumer / user it's more debatable).
But this is a business model, not a model for "free". A simple example would be Linux kernels, the upgrade of which are almost mandatory on recent hardware to make them able to function properly, but are irrelevant for older PCs.
This model is a cause for developers getting lost because if there's no upgrade in the last 3 months (which is also some kind of advertising), people may just shy away from their app. So, we end with most minor upgrades being ridiculous for most users because the new feature only fits for 1 guy on a thousand if not a million.

Returning to Flatpaks now.
My first contact with LM was Sylvia (18.3) coming from Ubuntu. I was some kind of rookie but with the desire to understand. At this beginning, I did what was "recommended" (the quotes are because when a rookie almost everything seems recommendable because you know nothing, then when your learning curve increases, you begin to know who's an expert you can rely on and who's relaying common stupidity we may also refer as urban legends).
I was using Flatpaks with my major apps (LO, Gimp, Handbrake) until one day LO became very buggy (it was a 6 version, but I don't remember which one, that caused the issue).
Since, I still use flatpaks but deactivated the Automation in the Update Manager for flatpaks, realizing being the first to get the apps can also mean being the first to get the bugs.
Every two weeks, I run a flatpak update command carefully avoiding a -y flag for automation. When I've got the list, I check on the app page what new feature this update brings. If I'm not interested and if the current version fulfills my needs, I don't update. A GUI helping users to select the updates they want may be a plus for people not at ease with CLI.
And of course and first of all, I'm asking myself : is the non-flatpak version coming with LM's Software Manager good enough for me ? If yes, I skip from the flatpak. Gimp was an example : for some time, the Software Manager provided 2.8 and very interesting features were implemented in the 2.10 series which was only available in the flatpak. Today, the Software Manager provides a 2.10 version (not as "advanced" as the flatpak I admit), but that downloads about 90 Mb instead of almost 1 Gb and 3 Gb disk space for the flatpak version. About the same for VLC.

My conclusion is that it isn't really fair only to rely on developers or app container systems to build a sound Linux ecosystem. We are part of it and have our word to say about what we'll accept and what we won't. Of course, none of us will change that system alone, but as a crowd it may be different...

PS : my way of using flatpak is absolutely not given here as a model. It's quite the opposite : many contributors had very interesting thoughts and their critics may improve that strategy of mine. Thanks in advance for those who will.

[MurphCID]

Good post. Some great points.

[grndplane]

I almost never post, I usually use gui's and not a lot of linux commands. Since everything has started to move to flatpaks, it is the only way to get newer versions of favorite programs (ex. handbrake). Handbrake-cli no longer works as permissions won't let it run in the Plex folders where my plex script needs to access it. Handbrake has some lame theme because permissions won't let it access system themes. There are work arounds that give flatpak access to all theme's and maybe other things. Flatpaks seem to be very bloated since they can not access system files they need to download all files for flatpak access even if you already have them. In my opinion we should stick with apt, and not use flatpaks. If it works why fix it. Another dissatisfied customer.

[Portreve]

The linux ecosystem is simply put a mess filled with extreme individualists with severe trust issues and elitism.

While I agree that instances such as they may exist of elitism are bad, i disagree with the implied criticism of "trust issues". Any informed and sane person rightfully should go about their lives — whether in the computer world or IRL — with healthy, heading sizes of skepticism about the intentions and actions of others. Human nature being what it is, there's so many opportunities for abuse and bad acts, and an incredibly well established history of the same.

..... and I can see no easy fix for it other than a wealthy but trusted patron that starts a new organization that does a kind of reorganization and opens a third way up for users so to speak.

This is not a criticism of what you said, but why in the 21st century are we still content on accepting the patronage system as a means for development and advancement? Admittedly it predates modern-day wage labor and capitalism (any version thereof, not just the present 20th/21st century versions we're living with) but it just rubs me the wrong way feeling like involuntary beholden-ism.

[cliffcoggin]

... but why in the 21st century are we still content on accepting the patronage system as a means for development and advancement?

What alternatives are there, given that any form of development in any field of endeavour costs money? Governments will not supply cash without imposing limitations on how it is spent, and likely also wanting control. Commercial organisations will not supply the cash unless a profit can be made, and Microsoft history shows where that leads. Non-commercial organisations generally don't have spare cash for such ephemeral projects. Doesn't that leave only rich altruistic patrons?

[MattJ86]

I don't care about this package manager war nonsense. I unlocked snap on Mint and use apt, downloaded .debs, snap and flatpak. I just care about software availability and having more options for getting software easily without compiling voodoo is my #1 priority on Linux.

[rambo919]

While I agree that instances such as they may exist of elitism are bad, i disagree with the implied criticism of "trust issues". Any informed and sane person rightfully should go about their lives — whether in the computer world or IRL — with healthy, heading sizes of skepticism about the intentions and actions of others. Human nature being what it is, there's so many opportunities for abuse and bad acts, and an incredibly well established history of the same.

The problem is the extremes that they try to force on other people..... where anything not open is "of the devil and must be fought". I already have a religion, I don't need this one too.

This is not a criticism of what you said, but why in the 21st century are we still content on accepting the patronage system as a means for development and advancement? Admittedly it predates modern-day wage labor and capitalism (any version thereof, not just the present 20th/21st century versions we're living with) but it just rubs me the wrong way feeling like involuntary beholden-ism.

The best predictor of the future is the past..... is any particular distro flush with resources from the patronage of it's general userbase the way Ubuntu was/is from a single individual?

I am all for peer to peer support but it simply has not yet produced what it should have.

On the other hand there is an old roman proverb/quote: it is better to have one bad general in command than two good one's.

The problem with crowd managed solutions is there is no strong single actor "taking the lead and killing rivals", and when one does appear the crowd kicks him around until he stops being effective. All you have is a gaggle of milling "geniuses" that does their pet project when they feel like it with no real motivation to do a complete or efficient job of it.... no one to effectively threaten them for not getting something done.

It's fine to be idealistic but it's realism that gets results.

[Aztaroth]

I don't care about this package manager war nonsense. I unlocked snap on Mint and use apt, downloaded .debs, snap and flatpak. I just care about software availability and having more options for getting software easily without compiling voodoo is my #1 priority on Linux.

Yeah, other people have the same attitude for pricing. They always buy the cheapest, not wanting to know if it comes of an adult worker of a western country or an 8-year Vietnamese child. The only thing that matters is their own profit.
Not telling you're one of them, just that doing without understanding consequences can lead to murky ways.

[MattJ86]

Yeah, other people have the same attitude for pricing. They always buy the cheapest, not wanting to know if it comes of an adult worker of a western country or an 8-year Vietnamese child. The only thing that matters is their own profit.
Not telling you're one of them, just that doing without understanding consequences can lead to murky ways.

What does this have to do with cheap labour and exploitation? Is anybody suffering, because I just want to use all the software sources I can get working? This an absurd comparison. And what are those consequences?

[Aztaroth]

And what are those consequences?

Read the previous posts of this thread and the article that generated it instead of just posting to say Kilroy was here...

[Portreve]

The problem is the extremes that they try to force on other people..... where anything not open is "of the devil and must be fought". I already have a religion, I don't need this one too.

I think there's some considerable distinction and nuance which belongs in there.

On the one hand, I absolutely think people should never touch non-free software. However, that's a preference, not a law, and given that "freedom to do what you want with your own purchased private property" is an intrinsic part of the GPL and other such licenses, I believe one absolutely should have the right (and therefore there absolutely should be a practical means to do so) to run non-free software. A right without a means is kind of useless.

On the other, I recognize there are certain types of software which, regrettably, are unlikely ever to be free software. Categorically, the one to which most such software belongs is that which exposes the user to some form of risk, especially of the legal and/or financial variety. A specific example of this is tax software, and broadly described, the reason is there is a LOT more going on with tax software than just the code itself, things which require liability insurance, something a free software designer or free software project group is unlikely to have, or to have the desire to obtain. Another category, which by the way can also be described as "a lot more going on than just the code which makes it" is specialty software like medical device software and/or firmware.

A third category of such software is that which incorporates pre-existing patented/trademarked/licensed components, like PMS colors or a PMS matching system, color calibration system, etc. So even though Scribus, the biggest name in libre-licensed desktop publishing software, would seem to exist in defiance of what I've just written, notice that there's a LOT of stuff (mostly components, but other functions as well) it doesn't include. There are no Pantone color swatches included with it, and even though you can go to Pantone's web site and pull up any color they have to get the CMYK breakout values and add them in manually, Scribus does not and cannot ship with them. Nor does nor can GIMP or Inkscape.

The best predictor of the future is the past..... is any particular distro flush with resources from the patronage of it's general userbase the way Ubuntu was/is from a single individual?

I am all for peer to peer support but it simply has not yet produced what it should have.

I'm not saying I utterly oppose the usage of patronage. I just say it rubs me the wrong way a bit, particularly in the traditional form of "some extremely wealthy person decides to make something happen". I just don't feel that "progress" is something which should come from "the Master's table".

They always buy the cheapest, not wanting to know if it comes of an adult worker of a western country or an 8-year Vietnamese child. The only thing that matters is their own profit.

Now that is something to which I am absolutely opposed: arbitrage. I feel there should be a well-crafted law which has the intended effect of outlawing the practice, yet allows for global trade itself, and allows for "technicality instances" of arbitrage, without letting the classical practice stand. For example, let's say there's some kind of thing which comes from Country X. For various completely legitimate reasons, the best way to get this thing is from those in Country X who produce it. If you have John Doe in the U.S. who could make it, or refine it, or whatever, and it would cost you $15 an hour to pay him to make it, but in Country X it would "only" cost $14.95 an hour, and the wage rate is not reason it's "desirable" to get it from Country X, then that should be allowable, since it's not really intended as arbitrage. I have no idea if a law could be so finely crafted; I'm simply trying to explain my intent.

[cliffcoggin]

Yeah, other people have the same attitude for pricing. They always buy the cheapest, not wanting to know if it comes of an adult worker of a western country or an 8-year Vietnamese child. The only thing that matters is their own profit.
Not telling you're one of them, just that doing without understanding consequences can lead to murky ways.

What does this have to do with cheap labour and exploitation? Is anybody suffering, because I just want to use all the software sources I can get working? This an absurd comparison. And what are those consequences?

He is making an analogy to suggest one should have principles when making choices in life.

[Aztaroth]

He is making an analogy to suggest one should have principles when making choices in life.

Absolutely. Wasn't intended to start a geopolitical issue. I was merely trying to say one should think about consequences of what he does. Maybe the example was not good chosen, because it could give ground to a controversy not related to the topic, even if we may consider we're in the Chat section.

[Aztaroth]

They always buy the cheapest, not wanting to know if it comes of an adult worker of a western country or an 8-year Vietnamese child. The only thing that matters is their own profit.

Now that is something to which I am absolutely opposed: arbitrage. I feel there should be a well-crafted law which has the intended effect of outlawing the practice, yet allows for global trade itself, and allows for "technicality instances" of arbitrage, without letting the classical practice stand. For example, let's say there's some kind of thing which comes from Country X. For various completely legitimate reasons, the best way to get this thing is from those in Country X who produce it. If you have John Doe in the U.S. who could make it, or refine it, or whatever, and it would cost you $15 an hour to pay him to make it, but in Country X it would "only" cost $14.95 an hour, and the wage rate is not reason it's "desirable" to get it from Country X, then that should be allowable, since it's not really intended as arbitrage. I have no idea if a law could be so finely crafted; I'm simply trying to explain my intent.

Hello,
Your post will help me to make things clearer with two examples :
- the first one will be you : you read my post, gave it some thoughts and finally came back quoting me and explaining why you were disagreeing. This attitude shows respect for my humble person and I'm thankful for it, even if not pursuing a debate out-of-that-topic.
- the other guy comes with a post beginning with "I don't care" and a "just for my ass" opinion. This shows, IMHO, disrespect for all previous posters who spent time trying to give ground to their opinions. Maybe instead of giving an inappropriate example, I should just have followed my first idea which was to say "You don't care and you are absolutely free to think this way. But there's a more respectful way for all previous posters to do this : just shut up and pass your way."

[MikeNovember]

Hi,
I think the question of the future is asked to users, and users don't have the answer, since they do not develop the distros, just use them.
Of course they have the choice of which distro they use.
Ubuntu will probably be more and more snap oriented.
What will do Debian? What will do Mint?
Some distros are already fully flatpak oriented, while others, of the rolling kind, still compile regularly fresh versions of apps.
Will this last? To spend time, money and energy on a project you need revenues. Today Linux distros are free (no cost), depend on donations or on ads. This will not probably be enough for all distros and their number will probably decrease.
So the question is "what kind of distro will you use in the future", and the interrogation is "what distros will be still available in the future". Wait and see...