I am currently using Linux Mint (after a long stint of using MX Linux) after learning it handles Nvidia graphics cards flawlessly, which I am grateful for. Whatever grief I have given Ubuntu in the past, I take it back because when they make something work, it is solid.

Anyways, like most distros these days, Flatpaks show up alongside native packages in the package manager / app store. I used to have a bias towards getting the natively packed version, but these days, I am choosing Flatpaks, precisely because I know they will be the latest version.

This includes Blender, Cura, Prusaslicer, and just now QBittorrent. I know this is probably dumb, but I choose the version based on which has the nicer icon.

  • DidacticDumbassOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    Great explanation and rationale for using Flatpaks! I hope others with questions see this.

    I understand how people may be annoyed by the redundancy of every app packaging their own lib, but I swear those are measured in kilobytes, and people tend to be so obsessively minimalist it is a non-issue. Then again, minimalist are probably compiling their software.

    • stravanasu@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I disagree. The other day I wanted to install some audio app that came in flatpak install format (I’ll check and add the name later). The app was less than 30MB in size, but the installation included 300MB of a previous version of org.freedesktop!

      • DidacticDumbassOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        I think that is one time download of a library so the app can run. Also, any other app that needs it.

        It seems to me that the biggest complaint people have with flatpaks are the space it takes.

        I wonder if the blow up in GBs was an early buggy behavior?