Appimages totally suck, because many developers think they were a real packaging format and support them exclusively.

Their use case is tiny, and in 99% of cases Flatpak is just better.

I could not find a single post or article about all the problems they have, so I wrote this.

This is not about shaming open source contributors. But Appimages are obviously broken, pretty badly maintained, while organizations/companies like Balena, Nextcloud etc. don’t seem to get that.

  • db2@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    While you’re not wrong, the problem I was referencing is an outdated library embedded in the image. It makes the whole app crash and it could happen to any app.

    • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      9 months ago

      That’s a creality problem. Not an appimage problem.

      They’d have a just as shitty flatpak or whatever else they used; because that’s how the company is.

      • db2@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Are you trying to tell me creality is the only one who would ever embed a library in an appimage? Isn’t that supposed to be half the point, that it comes with what it needs?

        • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          No. I’m telling you that they won’t maintain it properly.

          Not when it’s a reskinned cura fork. There marlin (printer firmware- nominally more important) versions are old too… last I checked, by years.