I’ve tried a few big apps in flatpak form, and usually they’re much bigger, and noticeably (many seconds) slower to start up. (Haven’t tried one with less than 4 cores, so can only imagine they being much slower.)
Well, could’ve been clearer, my experiences apply to snaps and flatpaks. Huger and slower. And I imagine that on older machines, with fewer cores, slower drives or less ram, possibly unuseable. (Don’t know.)
I do know that I’m seeing a lot less ‘Electron’ - framework apps (FAT and cycles-sucking) being released these days, doesn’t seem too popular.
Appimages are easier to install but have only tried a couple. ‘Stellarium.appImage’ is MUCH slower to load, but OK in operation.
I’d enjoy hearing the -measured numbers- and how many people prefer prefer these FAT formats and why.
rolls eyes
I’ve tried a few big apps in flatpak form, and usually they’re much bigger, and noticeably (many seconds) slower to start up. (Haven’t tried one with less than 4 cores, so can only imagine they being much slower.)
You wanted to say snaps are slower, right?
Well, could’ve been clearer, my experiences apply to snaps and flatpaks. Huger and slower. And I imagine that on older machines, with fewer cores, slower drives or less ram, possibly unuseable. (Don’t know.)
I do know that I’m seeing a lot less ‘Electron’ - framework apps (FAT and cycles-sucking) being released these days, doesn’t seem too popular.
Appimages are easier to install but have only tried a couple. ‘Stellarium.appImage’ is MUCH slower to load, but OK in operation.
I’d enjoy hearing the -measured numbers- and how many people prefer prefer these FAT formats and why.