Are Snaps Really THAT Bad?

NOTE: This video is my opinion, but I have switched to only making fact-based content.

In this video, I go over why the Snap packaging format for Linux is so controversial in the Linux community, as well as why Canonical (the company behind the packaging format) made these decisions, and why I personally don't like Snaps, in order to answer the question "Are Snaps Really THAT Bad?"

In case you are unfamiliar, a "Snap" is a self-contained Linux app, that will run on any Linux distro. Snaps have received a lot of attention in the Linux community (for the wrong reasons).

Timestamps:
Why Snaps are Controversial in the Linux Community (1:07):
1. There is only one centralized repository where you can get Snaps (1:07)
2. The server side of Snap (just the Snap Store ITSELF) is proprietary (2:37)
3. Snaps create TONS of loop devices (folders mounted as drives) (3:42)
4. Snaps automatically update (4:09)
Why I personally don't like Snaps (4:56):
1. Snaps are slow to launch (4:56)
2. Snaps don't respect your custom theme (5:55)
Are Snaps THAT bad? (6:40)

*I encourage you to actually watch the video, so you understand the context behind each reason, as well as my conclusion as to if Snaps are as bad as the Linux community thinks they are.

[mutcholokoW]

Bro, you are totally right! What an awesome video. Snaps will only get better and better :)

[GeraldOSteen]

First, let me open by saying that I appreciate your viewpoint as a younger Linux user. You've taken the time to put some real thought into forming your opinions and then your arguments behind them and put those on display for others, and that's to be commended. I also very much appreciate the somewhat formal outline provided for the video, with timestamps attached. That having been said, I'd like to rebut a couple of your arguments with a little perspective as someone who's been using Linux since it very first started.

Having a single centrally-controlled Snap repository is definitely a major issue for many in the community, that much is true, but we've always had repositories start somewhere centralized first before having the chance to branch them out. The problem, in this case, is that it doesn't look like that process will take place and Canonical insists on maintaining a stranglehold on this particular repository, effectively putting them in a position of undue authority. There are hundreds of maintainers for various packages that end up in the main Debian and even Ubuntu repositories and yet only select packages are repackaged for Snaps. This places a bit of a barrier, as a package which I may want to become a Snap cannot, even if I'm willing to put in the work to do it myself, because Canonical 'said so'. Atop this, it also opens up an avenue for Canonical to start charging for the snaps without technically violating the terms of the FOSS applications they're distributing, because they'd be charging for the repackaged 'easy to install & run' Snaps. While it's not really a major plausibility, it's still a possibility, and that's enough for some(remember, some of us are paranoid and staunch supporters of the bazaar).

You also mentioned a case where a centrally-controlled repository is likely to be more appealing to corporate entities looking to release software for Linux. That's not really the case. Your first argument on that was that companies may not want their software listed next to a bunch of "garbage" apps -- have you seen some of the software that's on the Snap 'store'(which often itself is riddled with problems for many people)? Now, I don't mean to insinuate that the software my fellow developers have created is "garbage", but that doesn't mean that corporations would be thrilled to have their software sit next to a random 1-star reviewed app that has little or nothing to do with their own just because the 'store' doesn't have the capability to properly categorize their differences -- it makes the company look worse than it is, and that's bad for business. Even as a FOSS developer, I'd advise my company to stay off that market. Of course, you can say that and still look at the Apple Store or Microsoft Store or any others and see somewhat similar cases where 'good' applications are seated next to 'weak' ones, but the storefront itself is also of better quality, so that's an area in which Canonical would need to work. The community would happily provide them support, though, if they weren't being so restrictive.

Now to your second argument, regarding a centrally-controlled repository being more appealing to corporate entities for releasing software for Linux. If your argument held true, in an absolute sense, then things like 'Epic Store', 'Uplay Connect', 'Origin Store', etc. would be virtually non-existent because Steam would just eat everything. I get that Steam remains, by far, more popular. However, software that is not made under contract with Epic or even using the Unreal Engine is released on the Epic Store because it is another avenue for revenue. One might argue that it's much easier to do that because, ultimately, it's largely software released for the same platform so they don't need to recode anything. That, however, is also not the case as additional libraries need to be created to support each of the APIs supported by those storefronts and, of course, someone has to be paid to go over all the financial and legal documents for everything prior to even scheduling the meeting to discuss the migration. Real effort is put toward that, and it's no different in this case; desiring to support Linux isn't going to be helped by a centrally-controlled Snap repository. For that matter, it would actually hurt, as it limits the platforms on which the software can ultimately be installed to only those which officially support that framework, and if that's being contested in the community across the entire platform on which you're looking to release, then that's a big red flag. Alternatively, you have something like Flatpak, which is a fully-open solution that has no central control restrictions or anything and can easily be installed anywhere, on almost any distribution, without much issue. If a corporation wanted to release software for Linux, Flatpak is by far the most appealing option between the two.

I realize that this has gotten long and I've spent three [not-so-well-written] paragraphs on a single area that you covered in only ninety seconds, but I did feel it necessary to do so. The main term I've been trying to push is "centrally-controlled"... As I mentioned; repositories have always had to start centrally at some point. The Debian repositories were 'centrally-maintained' but not 'centrally-controlled' and that allowed the birth of Ubuntu along with countless other distributions. Anyone can run an active or passive mirror of the repositories in part or in whole and can filter out packages which would be modified or left untouched. If you've had a VPS account anywhere using Linux, there's a very good chance that you've seen exactly this case, as the majority of the system would likely be using the main repositories filtered through the hosting company's local mirror so that the hosting company can replace some packages(like kernel or bootloader, for example) with some that have been modified to work with their own hosting configuration so your VPS doesn't spontaneously unalive itself. Centrally-controlled repositories do not permit this, and that's a major limitation in more ways than I can count. It *can* be remedied, however. If the Snap repositories were loosened so that they were centrally-maintained rather than centrally-controlled, then we could once again continue to make progress as we always have before and make things better for everyone... but Canonical has decided against this, and thus we are left with this strife.

If Ubuntu wasn't already such a major and popular decision, a choice like this would outright kill the distribution. The only reason there's this much argument about it is because people are trying to save it from its own destruction.

Moving on(I'll go through these pretty quickly now)...

[LorenzoPena]

As a lubuntu 22.04 user I've got just a few snaps. Moreover I've removed firefox, which I don't like. (I use mainly Vivaldi.) But such few remaining snaps as I have kept do not seem to be slow to open. Neither do they enter into collision with my theme, a navy desktop with no icons and no images.
Perhaps Ubuntu 24 has too many snaps, but apparently with Lubuntu 24 you can dispense with snaps.
Personally I fail to feel congenial with snap-haters. Canonical proposed snaps before appimages or flatpaks existed.
Snaps may be useful. And they are free, even if the snap-service software is "proprietary"

[albioncia]

I think what makes Linux community hate snap beside it's technical problem is it goes against free and open source software management but, you can't have your cake and eat it too. the snap store financially make sense and appealing for company, it baffled me that some loudest Linux community YouTuber who reccomend people to switch to Linux all the time but they don't like it if Linux go mainstream. snap store is a window for a mainstream company to release app and services for linux if Microsoft want to release Ms office they will release it in snap store they won't open their Ms office code for everyone to see in appinages or in Deb with decentralized dependencies and so does any other company who want to make a profit selling their app and services in Linux or in any other OS. and beside you don't have to use it, you like Ubuntu but you don't like snap it's fine just install synaptic or other package manager and be on your way, I love open source software and movement just like any other but I am also an engineering master student and a businessman if the tools that I need is only available in snap store then there where I'll be of course if I don't have to use the snap store I won't since the technicall problem in terms of launch speed and theming inconsistency won't go away anytime soon but if the app that I need is available in snap store I won't make my client wait till open source alternative for that app is available

[pauldilley]

Hell no, after listening to you, I think Snaps are one of the worst ideas Canonical has ever come up with. I am truly shocked! It makes me wanna switch away from Ubuntu lol.