purely as an end user i hate how much it downloads with each update and how much it uses the disk space although that's much less of an issue. i know it's solving a real problem and relieving a lot of the headaches of developers maintaing packages for each distro's specific package standard, but it's simply not the software distribution solution for people without at least well enough internet.

i wouldn't use any distro with flatpaks as its main way of delivering software and i would in almost all cases always choose alternatives even if it's outdated. i don't necessarily hate flatpak itself but for me i don't want to spend money on extra data cap and wait 30 minutes for a small update for my game launcher to finish.

the appimage of one of the applications i was interested in was 3 times less than the average flatpak update so redownloading the appimage every time would be better. if i installed more packages yeah the math would be better but it's still wasted data per update no matter how small it actually is. i found out after a while of using flatpak that i wouldn't just update and was stuck with outdated software anyway.

Does anyone know how they handle spoofed malware? I can never figure out whether I can trust the packages from flathub. I always have to check the official website of the particular software first.

It's the easiest solution to packaging software for Linux that doesn't mean it's good, In fact fhe way no dependencies are shared absolutely wrecks my hard drive and makes everything super long (downloading, updating, etc...).

Where it shines is security but to be honest do you really need an open source app to be in it's own secure sandbox?

I vastly prefer nix and I wish packaging stuff for it was easier.

Get Job done but remember don't use it for Browser and Text Editor. It will make you suffer.

Ambivalent. I like the consistency between distros and the idea of sandboxing, in practice sandboxing is a pain in the ass and Flatpaks use up an inordinate amount of space for different library versions. However, if I have to use a proprietary application I do appreciate the sandboxing and Flatpak is my preferred install method.

I love the idea and the philosophy behind ! I have no trouble with them for now, one click install perfect.

However I’ll never use it for programming and I don’t understand why people use vs code flatpak or other coding app, because the app is contained and cannot interact with your system.

Haven’t had issues, elementary uses them for system apps

I'm a bit "eh" on flatpak. The only benefit I see is that it's sometimes more up-to-date than what I can get from an LTS package repository. As a heavy CLI user they force me to find and click icons which is irritating (yeah - I know about flatpak run something.I.always.forget but that's even worse somehow).

I've hit occasional issues with applications being too locked-down. Like with Darktable only being able to see things in $HOME/Pictures. But I keep my photography work in a different location so it can't see it. I had to jump through some odd hoops to fix that. Not a problem of flatpak itself per se but something you can expect when dealing with package makers.

I fall back on flatpak if the version available through the standard package manager is too out-of-date for my liking. Other than that I can't be bothered.

EDIT: Okay - for people who think they're being "helpful" by telling me that "aliases are a thing" just stop. I'm not going to workaround a broken system. I'm going to use another one that isn't broken (or less broken).

I usually prefer not to use them, but they flatpak for Prism Launcher comes with all versions of Java preinstalled which is convenient because I play verious versions of Minecraf, other than that I try to use xbps as much as possible

I usually install Debian Linux on old Chromebooks that have only 16 GB SSD, and then gift them to my cousins or their kids. Flatpacks are out of the question, since pretty much every app I checked is between 500 and 1 GB of size. I only have 7.5 GB of free space in there after the base XFce Debian installation is done, plus 2 GB of swap. I find flatpacks to be space eaters, and I avoid them even on my normal, higher SSD size laptops.

I really like them. They give us a reliable application that doesn't depend the distro building a version for specific platform. For example if the newest versions are compiled for Ubuntu 24.04 but you're on 22.04 it might take a while to get the update.

It does come at a cost though, it'll have to package all the dependencies for 24.04 in a layer of the package so it'll take a long time to start up and take a lot more memory than necessary.

This is mitigated by flatpaks using same base for their application (like Ubuntu with Electron) but it still isn't the same as just starting up a proper apt program.

I really like it since we can have a modern version of a program for small distros and in general the barrier to entry so much lower so companies can't just say "oh we can't support all Linux distros, not feasible".

Aur you compile yourself for your own distro instead of it being done already by apt and the like.

Nix is a super cool since you can just setup and configure pretty much everything so that you just press "install" and you'll have your Gimp, VPN and whatever apps all done for you. You'll have to do some heavy configuration so programming knowledge is not necessary but really helps.

A lot of people seem to complain about them, but I really like them. I've even started using them over the AUR for some things now. I like that they keep certain things like Steam a lot tidier, and I like being able to see and control permissions and settings for everything all in Flatseal. The main downside I guess is that they use up more space by downloading dependencies for each app individually which is kind of redundant, but for me I've got a pretty big SSD in my laptop so it's never caused me any trouble. I could see how it could be a problem for someone with limited space on their system though.

Generally I tend to go Flatpak/AUR as a first choice, Appimage if I really need to, and Snaps never lol.

I wish more apps where officially supported, instead of saying it supports Linux and providing a .deb. Good thing the community provides unofficial flatpaks at least.

It's alright

The problem with Flatpak is that for me I would only use it to sandbox propietary apps, and most of these are not officially supported, so there is almost always something broken, like screen sharing, etc.

AUR is similar to flathub in that most packages aren't thoroughly checked. Except for the packaging guidelines which usually have to be followed. I'm not sure how in depth nixpkgs or other distros check the source of packages of new maintainers.

Flatpak runs on all distros and supports sandboxing, which makes it a great addition to all distro repos. AUR can cause issues with dependencies and unmaintained packages, and the make file should be read since it's run with root privileges. Additionally the AUR only works on Arch Linux. Breakage isn't a risk with Nix and it's seamless rollback, but has to be installed deeply into the system (/nix)

My personally preferred package manager for most GUI apps is flatpak. Nix is great because it allows to install packages declaratively.

Edit: NixOS -> Nix

Mostly positive. My encoding utility Aviator can be shipped with a custom community-backed SVT-AV1 fork in the background without anyone noticing any issues like they would if I linked to system SVT-AV1. Flatpak makes this kind of thing easy, and users don't have to think about it.

Flatpaks are great. I install my core os and gui with the base package management. All my user side packages are Flatpaks. I then use Flatseal to lock down and modify Flatpaks as needed. What's great is running programs like wine without installing a ton of dependencies and then locking the install from parts of my computer I don't want it to have access to.

It is awesome

On the one hand I like the basic idea, on the other hand I think that some fundamental problems aren't fully solved yet. There big use case are passkeys and direct password manager integration – neither mesh well with the idea of software that isn't allowed to talk to most of the system.

I'm certain that this will be resolved at some point but for now I don't think Flatpak and its brethren are quite there yet.

Doesn't work properly, apps are bigger and don't always apply GTK themes. I also can't easily edit the desktop file to edit the icons. I therefore only use it as a backup when I can't find an app on the AUR or office repositories, which is very rare.

My totally unscientific opinion (with a double-your-money-back guarantee!):

I'm not crazy about either Flatpak or Snap for that matter as there's so much backend baggage for both as well as certain hurdles regarding privileges and access to the file system (somebody please correct me if I'm wrong or working with dated information.)

My other completely prejudiced, unfounded bias against Flatpak is that it appears to have been adopted by RedHat as "the one true way," and what with IBM's/RedHat's behaviour anti-FOSS behaviour lately, plus I've almost always have been an apt user, I find it a pill hard to swallow.

Me, say what you will about the security issues and its other flaws, but I like AppImage.

I never ever will use a flatpak or snap or whatever "application". I'm using good old .deb package.