Post B8hWOQs5qyXCCHoDQ0 by portaloffreedom@social.linux.pizza
 (DIR) More posts by portaloffreedom@social.linux.pizza
 (DIR) Post #B8hUKnIMLDBUfzERcW by davidrevoy@framapiaf.org
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @NullTheFool They usually have some points:- Having to manage mime-type association manually- Having to create a shortcut to the executable manually on their main menu- Having to update the appimage manually or within the software itself (and not part of their update center)- Trusting a package coming from a website, not their distro- Having to right-click and give it execute permissionAll in all, Appimage are convenient for devs (and beta-testing), but less user friendly for daily users.
       
 (DIR) Post #B8hUuB55tgD4aBtpY0 by NullTheFool@mastodon.gamedev.place
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @davidrevoy Okay I haven't deal with most of these cause I use GearLever to manage mine, but yeah, I assume the vanilla experience of using AppImages is pretty clunky when you have to deal with this situations, also the trust issue is pretty notable, I can totally trust the official Krita developers to not put malware in their AppImage, but a more niche program can totally raise my eyebrows...
       
 (DIR) Post #B8hWOQs5qyXCCHoDQ0 by portaloffreedom@social.linux.pizza
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @davidrevoy @NullTheFool I might add: they are rarely done well and break after a few years because they didn't include the right libraries within. I have 2 examples already of broken appimages because they are too old. One having some weird mesa libraries inside that got old, the other requiring gtk2 libraries externally.