Very good now make a video how to UNINSTALL this apps and the dependencies when you download them from the web! That is 10x more confusing as there is no central place to uninstall them!
I don't think that's much of a problem unless it's done via building or converting them no? At least for deb I know it removes the dependencies if they are not used by anything else
Most apps I install from the web (which aren't in repos) install to the /opt folder. On Linux Mint you can uninstall them with the built in right click.
@@MichaelNROH fully uninstalling software is a bit annoying ( removing files in .local .cache .config or removing every file spread around the system installed by software.tar.gz ). For example it's almost impossible to fully remove Gnome / Kde from a system, some libs, configs, themes, caches will remain. On recent windows apps, you can go into the settings and "reset" the app then uninstall it and it'll be gone.
I think that if you're trying to remove apps and dependencies that you've gotten from the "web", is asking for trouble. Either install with a package manager, or make sure that everything you need (and might remove) for an app is in one folder. Stray dependencies aren't bad if they're isolated from package managers.
> Gnome software / KDE Discover > Install > Realize that the version in the repositories is very old, because you have Debian stable or something > Google for repository with more recent packages > A little magic in the terminal... > Profit (Or broken dependencies sometimes) > Google how to enable flatpak > Profit (Although I had cases when even this did not work due to bugs in old Nvidia video drivers)
I installed something on Discover a few days ago, decided it wasn't for me, went to uninstall but it wasn't showing in discover as something to uninstall and was also missing from discover for install. I had to look up a konsole command to remove it. I'm about five months into Linux use and the complications are ones I know my friends could not handle.
Not every tarball archive files are source-code. These archive files can also contain already compiled binary files you can copy to anywhere you want on your computer.
@@MichaelNROH That not always true, the actual problem with these binary archive files are needing to install required dependencies manually. Some developers might bundle some dependencies inside the archive file instead of using from host system.
I agree with you in principle, but in practice this is as annoying as it is useful, both as a developer and consumer on the developer side, it's either extra time+effort to package your app in multiple formats, or the risk that someone else will do it improperly which will still reflect poorly on you on the consumer side, there are many tradeoffs to consider. I often have the options of 1) a deb that has full functionality but is somewhat out of date 2) a Flatpak that has limited capability, even after configuring flatseal 3) an AppImage that takes up a ton of disk space 4) compiling the program myself, which can be complicated and requires additional manual work to check for updates and recompile the upshot is that as a Linux user you do need to be a bit in the weeds and understand how different app ecosystems work, which asks more of you than other operating systems
It blows my mind how all these people couldn't solve such a simple problem, and made it extremely complicated. And couldn't even make everything versioned, so that it would be possible to have old apps without having to maintain them. Windows is much better in that regard: if you have an installer/archive from 15 years ago, the app will most likely work, but if there's an old .deb package, you're most likely out of luck. Even Appimage most of the time didn't work for me, because there still was a dependency that wasn't included in the image. 99% of apps don't have the option to download them as a self-sufficient archive, so if you're not on one of the popular distros, or you're using an older version of a popular disto, you're fucked, you're stuck with whatever your package manager has to offer.
Desktop Linux in general has a problem of being heavily interconnected with the internet. Even on android you can install applications without internet by installing an APK file which usually works completely fine on older or newer versions of android (assuming the application itself works) whereas on linux when you install an application it always has to download dependencies even if you do have a deb/rpm/whatever. It's also the reason why a newer deb/rpm/whatever doesn't work on an older distro version because that older distro version does not ship the newer dependencies that application needs.
Linux Packaging formats are versioned. Older debs can pull older dependencies if they are referenced in it. The only exception would be if it is so old that these dependencies no longer exist. At this point they probably have major vulnerabilities anyway. And if you really insist, there is always self hosting
@@MichaelNROH oh yeah "vulnerabilities", that old story everyone repeats like they understand what the actual risks are, have the statistics and everything. Plenty of people use old software on Windows (also Win7 has the been the choice for lots of people for many years [so vulnerable, right?]) and have had zero problems. Yet everyone I know who got their machine compromised used the latest everything. This is all just a cargo cult of people who think safety is achieved by using the latest everything.
This is exactly why more and more are moving to Flatpak/Snap. To be fair though, a lot of Win apps also require dependencies which may or may not exist in your system. Things like older .NET versions, or MSVC++. The major difference is, since these dependencies mostly came from Microsoft (very rare to see a non-Microsoft dependency that is not included in the installer), they are also hosted by Microsoft. And Microsoft's vast resources means they have no trouble hosting these old dependencies, until we die of old age. Also, unrelated, but DT spotted at 1:35.
@@MichaelNROH not everything is versioned, and even if it is, most of the time you still can't have different versions installed. So even if all needed dependencies can be met, you won't be able to install an old app, because some of the deps can't coexist with the versions installed on the system
I think that the challenge is not in the variety of packaging formats used, but rather in your ability to uninstall an application. On Linux, each packaging format comes with its own way of uninstalling an application, and some apps don't even bother offering a way to uninstall. MacOS suffers from the same problem for a lot of apps. Windows, to my knowledge, is the best operating system in that regard. No matter what packaging tool you use, or installation wizard, you can always go to the Programs and Applications section, find the application and uninstall it. Sure some apps are better than others in uninstalling themselves, but that's, by far, the best that we have to address this issue.
This is a good and valid argument. I've personally only discovered a few applications that were hard to uninstall on Windows, but the general argument is right
Unfortunately this is not strictly true, the only times you can uninstall software from Programs and Applications is if the installer creates the uninstall registry entry. And often the entry can be wrong! I have had to fix Windows issues where the registry entry is completely missing the uninstall command that Programs and Features calls when you uninstall. I've also had to fix Windows issues where the registry entry has the WRONG uninstall command, possibly from an old install or as a bug during install. Meaning the uninstall never happens even when using Programs and Features. As an average user you may not see these often, but as an administrator it is a daily thing that is seen. Broken installs, broken registry entries, and everything in between can prevent uninstalls in Windows. The number of times I have had to manually delete every Office related folder, Dragon Naturally Speaking folder, etc is unfathomable.
Uninstalling apps on Linux is much easier than Windows, not sure about MacOS. Especially when it comes to flatpak and snap since those also sandbox the files an app would normally place directly into your home directory.
.exe is a weird kind of archive .msi is a weird kind of archive .pdf is a weird kind of archive .xls is a weird kind of archive .odt is a weird kind of archive
I fully agree packaging format is irrelevant if you're using an app store. My issue is the way some things are handle like flatpak permissions, or some native packages don't always appear on the store or native packages that are old or don't work well. We only need to refine the experience of the stores for the common users. Advance users know their way around.
I feel like many problems with flatpak could be solved if they integrate it better into the Desktop Environment itself. Kind of like KDE Plasma, but when opening a new app for the first time, it asks something like "This application wants access all your drives" and gives you an option to confirm or set custom ones
Yeah the old packages in the GUI thing threw me off heavily back in 2021 when I tried to install dolphin emulator in the pop shop and it was several years out of date. Stuff like that is why I don't use stable distributions much and when I do I use flatpak heavily.
Fun fact: MacOS apps are folders that follow a certain specification. You can’t download a folder directly, so that’s why Mac apps get downloaded as .dmg or .zip files
Not a fan of chaotic myself but AUR with yay is nice. First thing you do is yay *something* and then maybe read the pkgbuild to make sure it's not doing anything funny.
I believe that package formats is only a issue if you want it to be; the apps stores of main stream Distros are good enough you can just install your apps without a problem. So, stay with the app store when possible and you're fine.
The native packages are usually woefully out of date and rarely get updates. Snap and flatpak stay up to date. But yeah the whole thing is messy because some apps only come in one package or another so sometimes you have to use all of them.
I grew up with Windows and Mac and have been a long-time Android user so I got very used to the installers and app stores alike. I have found instances such as OBS where it's better to install the Flatpak because it's newer and has more functionality than the native distro version like on Fedora and OpenSUSE. What I found however is that OBS used more CPU with Flatpak on Fedora but this isn't an issue with my OpenSUSE installation.
For a newbie, yes, definitely. Anyone who doesn't have some experience using Linux's ecosystem is going to have problems adjusting. Once you're adjusted to it, then it's second nature like installing apps on Windows is for Windows users. If anything, I wouldn't exactly say it's particularly difficult to do, and in fact I think the Linux method is easier, but it is a point where Linux and Windows differ and you could make a whole series about contrasting the two in that way.
Between pacman, paru, and the odd flatpak installing apps is honestly simple on Arch. Honestly I think the differences in packaging has a certain charm to it vs something like .exe or .MSI installers.
@@MichaelNROHBut take Mint, you get the option of installing the deb or the flatpak, but the deb is usually several versions behind. A non Linux user isn't going to know this.
You can't, but you can make the vast majority available on the store with some effort, and tell end users to ignore apps not on the store like they do on Android/iOS.
@@wojtek-33 I fell into that beginner trap myself in 2021 on Pop OS. I had no idea what a flatpak was and I was confused when I downloaded the dolphin emulator deb and it was several years out of date. I know better now, but I feel a lot of other people will fall into the same trap, especially if they are using a distro based on Ubuntu LTS with old packages.
I got really frustrated when I first started with Mint trying to download the "Windows" way at first once I used the App Centre then it started to click but was still frustrated when certain programs weren't there but tbh the way that makes the most sense for some reason even though the language is a bit confusing at first is using pacman and yay in arch distros
I prefer Flatpak because of the isolation, easy updates, and compatibility. Sure, there is extra configuration, for instance, using the Steam Flatpak meant giving it special permission to access my SSD where my Steam library resides. If I can't find an app in Flatpak, I'll turn to a native binary, and in the worse case scenario, if I really need the software I'll use the AUR. Obligatory: I run Arch btw.
No matter the format, you double click on a setup and it installs it on Windows, because it puts an .exe file somewhere and links it to Start Menu/Programs. Numbers of format means nothing if it's not installable on my OS.
Why do you act like you want to scare away newbies in the first part of the video? Just say outright that they can open their graphical software manager and have it automatically install whatever they want
When i want to install something, i start at the software repository, if that doesn't have the app, then I usually ask Gemini how to install it via the terminal. This has been mostly successful. Or if its a windows application, i download the .exe file and open WINE explorer and open it. Its been a learning experience. I run either Mint 20 with Gnome or Fedora 40 with Gnome. use GRUB to switch.
For me the OS with best app management is Android. The killer feature for me is *opt-in permission management* - if the app wants to, let's say, access your photos or your microphone, then Android will ask you either to give the permission for it or not. Even malware couldn't do anything harmful if you don't give permissions to it. And I'm surprised that this concept isn't used in other OSes (while Flatpak has permission management, those permissions are *opt-out* - if the app wants to access camera it'll just do it, unless you disable it in settings *before* launching that app), it has more security to it than what any antivirus can achieve. Another thing is uninstalling apps - it's centralized on Android and is done by Android. On Windows it's centralized, but is done by the apps themselves, which just baffles me - how would you trust the developer of the app you want to delete? What if it leaves a malicious thing behind? On Linux everything is done by package managers, adds more complexity, but the way itself is at least somewhat secure. The final reason are the packaging formats themselves. On Windows: - exe, may or may not download additional files from internet, raising security concerns and can be created by anybody - msi, all necessary files are inside, requires Microsoft's signature which isn't easy to get, so most of the devs just use exe - microsoft store formats - same as msi, but more complex On Android: - apk, the simplest one, but has certain limitations, like only being able to include up to 4 architectures (which is a problem since Android TV and Android x86 exist), nowadays for some Google Play exclusive apps it's not even available - aab, Google's answer to apk problems - a big archive with all kinds of architectures, drawables and languages, which gets split up by Google Play into separate apk files to meet the requirements of your specific device. The problem is the start of adding complexity to Android packaging formats - apks, basically apk files that got split by Google Play's aab, nowadays is replaced by xapk - xapk, basically easier to make apks with self-extracting to /sdcard/Android/obb/ functionality (you can't do this manually since Android 13 without hacky/temporary ways), made by APKPure - apkm, the same thing as xapk, but worse, made by APKMirror, nowadays replaced by xapk At the end of the day they're all apk. Nowadays most of third party file managers support installing all of these, so it doesn't matter what you use. And that's the neat thing - it got a centralized way to install packages even after all aab shenanigans Can't say anything for sure about Linux since I'm still a noob. For now I prefer Android's way of handling these.
if I can use flatpak, I use flatpak, but a lot of my dev tools need system paths, compiler, docker, ... so it's just easier to just use system package management (something like Octopi) or AUR. flatpak apps are used for browser, steam, games, etc. ... and sometimes there are weird drag&drop problems with flatpak apps.
Yeah, I'm not sure if drag and drop issues are Flatpak related anymore. I thought so, but then it happened on native Apps as well. Could be related to XWayland since I noticed more breakages after I used an app that uses it
I'm decently happy with just installing my dev tools in a distrobox container. That also lets me set a custom home directory so I can have different IDEs set up differently for different languages and with different extensions.
I've never had a single problem using any flatpak application or emulators even before I installed flatseal ( Linux Mint Cinnamon user here since late 2010 ). And NO I didn't have to perform any special tweaks..nor folder permissions adjusting either. " and takes up way too much space. Its not ideal " 1. How many flatpaks have you installed when you came to that opinion? 2. How much actual space ...TOTAL was consumed by just flatpak applications? You do realize that they include all the necessary dependencies all in one deal right? And when there are updates... the updates DON'T add to the size of the original flatpak application's space consumption, it replaces necessary to replace things. There is more to explain, but honestly I'm pretty exhausted from yard work and doing Uber Eats food deliveries and editing the subtitle file of a movie. ..So I'm forgetting what those things could be at the moment.
I don't really agree with your Android comparison. Sure installing apps is done through a store, but if you don't want to use it there's one standard for installing apps .. the APK file. So sure the default on Linux also is a 'store', but then there is the mess of packaging formats if you don't want to use it. So basically Android fixed it, Linux needs to step up. I know what the challenges are, but c'mon why not work together
Well, Android only really offers support for APKs, so it's a format forced by Google which is why it worked. It's a walled garden in this perspective, which Linux is not
@@Deezter16 We already have standards, we just have quite a few. There's no way to coerce the whole community into going for a single standard without stripping a way the right for distro maintainers to use what they want - which would be turning it into a walled garden like we already have.
Definitely your worst video so far, sounds like the biased marketing stuff we're used to see from big tech companies. Your description of the Windows installation is deliberately complicated and not representing reality. Who cares whether an installer is .exe or .msi (do those even still exist?), who cares whether files get downloaded directly or over an installer? The process stays the same: download - double click - done. On Linux fragmentation IS by far its biggest problem, and that exactly is the reason why you can't compare it to Android: Android has exactly ONE installer where you will find ALL programs (ignore Samsung stuff). On Linux you have different distros, different desktops, different packages and different installers - and sometimes you even have to add specific repositories. Therefore every installer will show you different programs. The problem on Linux is not installing an app through an installer, the problem is that every installer will have a different applications available.
Really? 1. You are used to double clicking an executable Windows file. 2. You apparently have used a Linux distro that has a software installer. 3. Sure, installing software via command line is harder on Windows and Linux.
i am animator and tried to enter linux. got afraid of distros. then i studied more and came across these packages and got afraid again as i need to use latest krita kdenlive etc. linux is not as convenient as it seems.
I can handle small packages but when you switching DE they always left some dot files so annoying and if you have long time system lets say you went to gnome then switch to kde after 1 year you want to try agine gnome and boom errors on start conflicts dots files
I can't stand "app store" type installers because they never have what you're looking for. They're nice for things they have, but when I'm looking for Olive Editor and they don't have it i should never have to look at a terminal. I even had ai help me for like 15 minutes, but it wasn't any help. If copy and paste the command, and it would just respond with an error. I really want to switch from Windows
Hard? Not Really. First out of all the distros there are only 3 roots -- RedHat, Debian, Suse. Each has their on way of handling installs. So that is 3 roots for install. Now to save time, find the features you need and settle on one of the 3 root distros. Like to distro hop? Just stick to one of the roots when you go thru the forks in your hopping and you will know how to do the install. Has worked for over 20yrs for me. Better yet, roll your own and call it a day.
Na, windows installer is horrible but works. Linux is just a nightmare, if your package manager has old outdated packages (or forcing snaps/flatpaks) which it does especially on debian related distros then you'll have to mess around with third party repo sources or branches that in turn create dependency hell, use terminal instructions to install a portable into opt and its link/desktop file or build the program itself. Devs are simply too lazy to package their own software for all the formats and distros themselves because there are simply too many. It's p. much the defining reason nobody uses linux actually, every problem whether it's driver incompatibility or software bugs are just symptoms of a lack of understanding for what a normal desktop user wants.
Hear me out. Linux isn't for average people even though many RUclipsrs denies it. If it was, then the would've made it as use friendly as possible like Windows and Mac
Flatpaks are usually only that big for the first installs, since you need the runtimes. Afterwards it's just the application itself, but I can agree with the initial installation
I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're refering to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX. Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called Linux, and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project. There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called Linux distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux!
That's not an issue on Arch. Everything is in official repos/AUR. Just use AUR helper like yay. One place to install any program, one command to update everything. I don't use other distros because I'm too dumb to use all of those different ways to manage programs. Arch is the simplest.
People do this video like every 3 months. With the same complaints that are normally "it doesn't work like Windows". If you don't like choice, don't use an open source OS. Been hearing this now for the past 20 years.
Why wouldn't a user go to the repository first? There's no point in doing a Web search if your distribution has an approved application built-in. That way of thinking is part of what made "windows" such a joke. Unless you need the bleeding-edge version, the repository will install and take care of the dependencies.
Because a user first needs to know of the repository. Same can be said for why people don't just use the Microsoft Store on Windows. Familiarity and most don't want a new way
"I've always done it that way" doesn't make it a good idea. Whenever I recommend Debian etc., I include an explanation of the repository. The whole package is closer to safe -- not just the OS itself. If you want to be part of the change, you should also make that explanation.
Brother please help. nvidia kernel module missing falling back to nouveau. This is the major problem,I think everyone is facing in fedora 40. Can't install nvidia drivers.
It might be related to Secure Boot. I haven't touched NVIDIA drivers for a while but there are some reports that the modules are no longer signed. Try disabling it and see it it is working. If it is, look into "Signing NVIDIA driver on Fedora"
That's a general problem unfortunately. Desktop Operating Systems, except Apple have this in common, but are lucky enough to already establish one Standard someone could go with
@@MichaelNROH I'm not sure if I follow, there are indeed multiple packaging ways for apps on Windows, but they all work within the same platform, no matter which you choose. Linux has many, but if you bundle your app as an RPM, there's no running it on a Debian based distro (or maybe there is, but not an obvious one). Then there's distros packaging applications themselves which is not a good idea, since users are losing in consistency and developers are losing in that they get bug reports for stuff that was fixed 2 versions ago in the case where the distro has a very slow release cycle. This is why the Bottles developers only support their own official build, which is a flatpak. Now I think snaps and flatpaks are eventually going to address these shortcomings, but things are not there yet. Linux is becoming better and better as a regular user OS, and I'm happy to see it, since Windows is ever becoming worse.
No I disagree .. 99% of things are just as simple as windows to install them. just open the software center search install. only a few things are complicated IMO, things like davinci resolve and such needs major improvement to make installing them simple
I use Linux, but I disagree on the .exe comment. Everything is self-contained to the .exe _(if there are no dll's, etc.)_ and other applications reference acknowledgment of this installation and can be used together _(like drag and drop functionality, etc.)_ with other applications without having to "point to" it or "make it the default," *even if the installed program is moved.* Appimages _(closest equivalent)_ do not even compare, as you have to edit a menu to place the applications you want in the app launcher or make a shortcut, *and even then if they are moved, the reference(s) to the application(s) do not update.* I don't understand why people are claiming packages are better either when 6/10 times it's being maintained by some random guy and not the people working on it at all. I don't know... It's just a mess all around, I'm just here... 😅
Windows has the Microsoft Store and Winget. Most software is available this way and should be the preferred method. Downloading installers should be the last resort.
Compared to how many Windows apps there are, the MS store and winget has a horrible small selection of packages. Linux by comparison has implemented this for way way longer and a lot more stuff is available
@@csteelecrs AMD Radeon Software would be a good example. It doesn't come with Windows Update and is also not available via Winget I think. Popular Vendors might have a package up there, but you would be suprised how many requests of obscure software I get from time to time
@@MichaelNROH That’s driver software doesn’t count. You should be very cautious about any obscure software. You should always look for an alternative that is available.
@@csteelecrs Why do the drivers do not count? I will argue that those should be one of the top priorities to get in the store, since they run at the kernel.
Linux is the colloquial term used for Linux kernel based operating systems. Like how pie is a term for all pie crust based pastries. Its both socially and commercially acceptable to call Linux based OS, "Linux"
Computer Terminology is different from consumer terminology for a reason. If you say Debian is an Operating System, then no one knows what it is compatible with
Very good now make a video how to UNINSTALL this apps and the dependencies when you download them from the web! That is 10x more confusing as there is no central place to uninstall them!
I don't think that's much of a problem unless it's done via building or converting them no?
At least for deb I know it removes the dependencies if they are not used by anything else
Most apps I install from the web (which aren't in repos) install to the /opt folder.
On Linux Mint you can uninstall them with the built in right click.
@@MichaelNROH fully uninstalling software is a bit annoying ( removing files in .local .cache .config or removing every file spread around the system installed by software.tar.gz ). For example it's almost impossible to fully remove Gnome / Kde from a system, some libs, configs, themes, caches will remain. On recent windows apps, you can go into the settings and "reset" the app then uninstall it and it'll be gone.
on arch (btw), i just do `yay -Rns thunar` and it uninstalls everything related to thunar. pretty ez
I think that if you're trying to remove apps and dependencies that you've gotten from the "web", is asking for trouble. Either install with a package manager, or make sure that everything you need (and might remove) for an app is in one folder. Stray dependencies aren't bad if they're isolated from package managers.
> Gnome software / KDE Discover
> Install
> ???
> Profit
> Gnome software / KDE Discover
> Install
> Realize that the version in the repositories is very old, because you have Debian stable or something
> Google for repository with more recent packages
> A little magic in the terminal...
> Profit (Or broken dependencies sometimes)
> Google how to enable flatpak
> Profit (Although I had cases when even this did not work due to bugs in old Nvidia video drivers)
I installed something on Discover a few days ago, decided it wasn't for me, went to uninstall but it wasn't showing in discover as something to uninstall and was also missing from discover for install. I had to look up a konsole command to remove it. I'm about five months into Linux use and the complications are ones I know my friends could not handle.
Until half of the software you need isn't available in Discover/Gnome Software.
until you realize you cant install everything like libraries and various other dependencies from there
@@kote315 flatpak for life 🤩🤩🤩
Not every tarball archive files are source-code. These archive files can also contain already compiled binary files you can copy to anywhere you want on your computer.
They can, but they usually aren't depending on what you ship it for. Even for Linux, already compiled code might not work as intended
and sometimes the have treir own install scripts
@@MichaelNROH That not always true, the actual problem with these binary archive files are needing to install required dependencies manually. Some developers might bundle some dependencies inside the archive file instead of using from host system.
I actually kind of like this. I like the fact that Linux is open enough to have different ways to install apps.
I agree with you in principle, but in practice this is as annoying as it is useful, both as a developer and consumer
on the developer side, it's either extra time+effort to package your app in multiple formats, or the risk that someone else will do it improperly which will still reflect poorly on you
on the consumer side, there are many tradeoffs to consider. I often have the options of
1) a deb that has full functionality but is somewhat out of date
2) a Flatpak that has limited capability, even after configuring flatseal
3) an AppImage that takes up a ton of disk space
4) compiling the program myself, which can be complicated and requires additional manual work to check for updates and recompile
the upshot is that as a Linux user you do need to be a bit in the weeds and understand how different app ecosystems work, which asks more of you than other operating systems
It blows my mind how all these people couldn't solve such a simple problem, and made it extremely complicated.
And couldn't even make everything versioned, so that it would be possible to have old apps without having to maintain them.
Windows is much better in that regard: if you have an installer/archive from 15 years ago, the app will most likely work, but if there's an old .deb package, you're most likely out of luck.
Even Appimage most of the time didn't work for me, because there still was a dependency that wasn't included in the image.
99% of apps don't have the option to download them as a self-sufficient archive, so if you're not on one of the popular distros, or you're using an older version of a popular disto, you're fucked, you're stuck with whatever your package manager has to offer.
Desktop Linux in general has a problem of being heavily interconnected with the internet. Even on android you can install applications without internet by installing an APK file which usually works completely fine on older or newer versions of android (assuming the application itself works) whereas on linux when you install an application it always has to download dependencies even if you do have a deb/rpm/whatever. It's also the reason why a newer deb/rpm/whatever doesn't work on an older distro version because that older distro version does not ship the newer dependencies that application needs.
Linux Packaging formats are versioned. Older debs can pull older dependencies if they are referenced in it.
The only exception would be if it is so old that these dependencies no longer exist. At this point they probably have major vulnerabilities anyway.
And if you really insist, there is always self hosting
@@MichaelNROH oh yeah "vulnerabilities", that old story everyone repeats like they understand what the actual risks are, have the statistics and everything.
Plenty of people use old software on Windows (also Win7 has the been the choice for lots of people for many years [so vulnerable, right?]) and have had zero problems.
Yet everyone I know who got their machine compromised used the latest everything.
This is all just a cargo cult of people who think safety is achieved by using the latest everything.
This is exactly why more and more are moving to Flatpak/Snap. To be fair though, a lot of Win apps also require dependencies which may or may not exist in your system. Things like older .NET versions, or MSVC++. The major difference is, since these dependencies mostly came from Microsoft (very rare to see a non-Microsoft dependency that is not included in the installer), they are also hosted by Microsoft. And Microsoft's vast resources means they have no trouble hosting these old dependencies, until we die of old age.
Also, unrelated, but DT spotted at 1:35.
@@MichaelNROH not everything is versioned, and even if it is, most of the time you still can't have different versions installed. So even if all needed dependencies can be met, you won't be able to install an old app, because some of the deps can't coexist with the versions installed on the system
Found your channel recently and I have been binge watching your videos, they are very good. Keep up the good work.😊
Thanks
I think that the challenge is not in the variety of packaging formats used, but rather in your ability to uninstall an application. On Linux, each packaging format comes with its own way of uninstalling an application, and some apps don't even bother offering a way to uninstall. MacOS suffers from the same problem for a lot of apps. Windows, to my knowledge, is the best operating system in that regard. No matter what packaging tool you use, or installation wizard, you can always go to the Programs and Applications section, find the application and uninstall it. Sure some apps are better than others in uninstalling themselves, but that's, by far, the best that we have to address this issue.
This is a good and valid argument. I've personally only discovered a few applications that were hard to uninstall on Windows, but the general argument is right
Unfortunately this is not strictly true, the only times you can uninstall software from Programs and Applications is if the installer creates the uninstall registry entry. And often the entry can be wrong! I have had to fix Windows issues where the registry entry is completely missing the uninstall command that Programs and Features calls when you uninstall. I've also had to fix Windows issues where the registry entry has the WRONG uninstall command, possibly from an old install or as a bug during install. Meaning the uninstall never happens even when using Programs and Features.
As an average user you may not see these often, but as an administrator it is a daily thing that is seen. Broken installs, broken registry entries, and everything in between can prevent uninstalls in Windows. The number of times I have had to manually delete every Office related folder, Dragon Naturally Speaking folder, etc is unfathomable.
If you know your package Manager it will Not be that big of a Deal.
Uninstalling apps on Linux is much easier than Windows, not sure about MacOS. Especially when it comes to flatpak and snap since those also sandbox the files an app would normally place directly into your home directory.
i mean right click it in the start menu and pick uninstall, right? not too hard...
.exe is a weird kind of archive
.msi is a weird kind of archive
.pdf is a weird kind of archive
.xls is a weird kind of archive
.odt is a weird kind of archive
if you clicked a tar.gz file and it was installed there wouldn't be an issue
@@raidev_ that's basically what .deb files are
@@notuxnobux yes, if you're on a debian or derivative at least
I fully agree packaging format is irrelevant if you're using an app store. My issue is the way some things are handle like flatpak permissions, or some native packages don't always appear on the store or native packages that are old or don't work well.
We only need to refine the experience of the stores for the common users. Advance users know their way around.
I feel like many problems with flatpak could be solved if they integrate it better into the Desktop Environment itself.
Kind of like KDE Plasma, but when opening a new app for the first time, it asks something like "This application wants access all your drives" and gives you an option to confirm or set custom ones
@@MichaelNROH yessss amen
Yeah the old packages in the GUI thing threw me off heavily back in 2021 when I tried to install dolphin emulator in the pop shop and it was several years out of date. Stuff like that is why I don't use stable distributions much and when I do I use flatpak heavily.
Fun fact: MacOS apps are folders that follow a certain specification. You can’t download a folder directly, so that’s why Mac apps get downloaded as .dmg or .zip files
Arch + Chaotic AUR = Simple
Since when is Arch simple?
Not a fan of chaotic myself but AUR with yay is nice. First thing you do is yay *something* and then maybe read the pkgbuild to make sure it's not doing anything funny.
So many people think Arch is super complicated, but there’s literally a text-based installer. So much ignorance
Arch and YAY is the best thing ever, so easy to install things, not even Windows can match
@@cookieface80 Simple ≠ Easy
I believe that package formats is only a issue if you want it to be; the apps stores of main stream Distros are good enough you can just install your apps without a problem. So, stay with the app store when possible and you're fine.
app / program via native packages manager is easy on linux compare to windows, but the self-contained app image or flatpak indeed pretty messy
The native packages are usually woefully out of date and rarely get updates. Snap and flatpak stay up to date. But yeah the whole thing is messy because some apps only come in one package or another so sometimes you have to use all of them.
@@wojtek-33 what package manage yours?
@@optimaiz I use, deb, flatpak and app images.
@@wojtek-33 make sense, I use rpm. Bleeding edge update and reliable ime
I grew up with Windows and Mac and have been a long-time Android user so I got very used to the installers and app stores alike. I have found instances such as OBS where it's better to install the Flatpak because it's newer and has more functionality than the native distro version like on Fedora and OpenSUSE. What I found however is that OBS used more CPU with Flatpak on Fedora but this isn't an issue with my OpenSUSE installation.
For a newbie, yes, definitely. Anyone who doesn't have some experience using Linux's ecosystem is going to have problems adjusting. Once you're adjusted to it, then it's second nature like installing apps on Windows is for Windows users. If anything, I wouldn't exactly say it's particularly difficult to do, and in fact I think the Linux method is easier, but it is a point where Linux and Windows differ and you could make a whole series about contrasting the two in that way.
Between pacman, paru, and the odd flatpak installing apps is honestly simple on Arch. Honestly I think the differences in packaging has a certain charm to it vs something like .exe or .MSI installers.
5:20 the problem is: you can't ensure that every app is available on the store
Yeah, but if it is, then there is just one selection. That is the point I'm trying to make
@@MichaelNROHBut take Mint, you get the option of installing the deb or the flatpak, but the deb is usually several versions behind. A non Linux user isn't going to know this.
You can't, but you can make the vast majority available on the store with some effort, and tell end users to ignore apps not on the store like they do on Android/iOS.
@@wojtek-33 I fell into that beginner trap myself in 2021 on Pop OS. I had no idea what a flatpak was and I was confused when I downloaded the dolphin emulator deb and it was several years out of date. I know better now, but I feel a lot of other people will fall into the same trap, especially if they are using a distro based on Ubuntu LTS with old packages.
I got really frustrated when I first started with Mint trying to download the "Windows" way at first once I used the App Centre then it started to click but was still frustrated when certain programs weren't there but tbh the way that makes the most sense for some reason even though the language is a bit confusing at first is using pacman and yay in arch distros
I prefer Flatpak because of the isolation, easy updates, and compatibility. Sure, there is extra configuration, for instance, using the Steam Flatpak meant giving it special permission to access my SSD where my Steam library resides. If I can't find an app in Flatpak, I'll turn to a native binary, and in the worse case scenario, if I really need the software I'll use the AUR. Obligatory: I run Arch btw.
No matter the format, you double click on a setup and it installs it on Windows, because it puts an .exe file somewhere and links it to Start Menu/Programs.
Numbers of format means nothing if it's not installable on my OS.
I've always wondered how all these distros can afford the hosting and bandwidth fees for the packages.
Sponsors and many mirrors. Any university or company in the network space is free to host their own mirror and many do
@@MichaelNROH This. The mirror I currently use for Tumbleweed is a volunteer mirror (or at least, it seems like it is).
In a past video you said it was easy. Even easier than windows
Why do you act like you want to scare away newbies in the first part of the video? Just say outright that they can open their graphical software manager and have it automatically install whatever they want
When i want to install something, i start at the software repository, if that doesn't have the app, then I usually ask Gemini how to install it via the terminal. This has been mostly successful. Or if its a windows application, i download the .exe file and open WINE explorer and open it. Its been a learning experience. I run either Mint 20 with Gnome or Fedora 40 with Gnome. use GRUB to switch.
For me the OS with best app management is Android. The killer feature for me is *opt-in permission management* - if the app wants to, let's say, access your photos or your microphone, then Android will ask you either to give the permission for it or not. Even malware couldn't do anything harmful if you don't give permissions to it. And I'm surprised that this concept isn't used in other OSes (while Flatpak has permission management, those permissions are *opt-out* - if the app wants to access camera it'll just do it, unless you disable it in settings *before* launching that app), it has more security to it than what any antivirus can achieve.
Another thing is uninstalling apps - it's centralized on Android and is done by Android. On Windows it's centralized, but is done by the apps themselves, which just baffles me - how would you trust the developer of the app you want to delete? What if it leaves a malicious thing behind? On Linux everything is done by package managers, adds more complexity, but the way itself is at least somewhat secure.
The final reason are the packaging formats themselves.
On Windows:
- exe, may or may not download additional files from internet, raising security concerns and can be created by anybody
- msi, all necessary files are inside, requires Microsoft's signature which isn't easy to get, so most of the devs just use exe
- microsoft store formats - same as msi, but more complex
On Android:
- apk, the simplest one, but has certain limitations, like only being able to include up to 4 architectures (which is a problem since Android TV and Android x86 exist), nowadays for some Google Play exclusive apps it's not even available
- aab, Google's answer to apk problems - a big archive with all kinds of architectures, drawables and languages, which gets split up by Google Play into separate apk files to meet the requirements of your specific device. The problem is the start of adding complexity to Android packaging formats
- apks, basically apk files that got split by Google Play's aab, nowadays is replaced by xapk
- xapk, basically easier to make apks with self-extracting to /sdcard/Android/obb/ functionality (you can't do this manually since Android 13 without hacky/temporary ways), made by APKPure
- apkm, the same thing as xapk, but worse, made by APKMirror, nowadays replaced by xapk
At the end of the day they're all apk. Nowadays most of third party file managers support installing all of these, so it doesn't matter what you use. And that's the neat thing - it got a centralized way to install packages even after all aab shenanigans
Can't say anything for sure about Linux since I'm still a noob. For now I prefer Android's way of handling these.
Good as always❤
if I can use flatpak, I use flatpak, but a lot of my dev tools need system paths, compiler, docker, ... so it's just easier to just use system package management (something like Octopi) or AUR.
flatpak apps are used for browser, steam, games, etc. ... and sometimes there are weird drag&drop problems with flatpak apps.
Yeah, I'm not sure if drag and drop issues are Flatpak related anymore. I thought so, but then it happened on native Apps as well.
Could be related to XWayland since I noticed more breakages after I used an app that uses it
I'm decently happy with just installing my dev tools in a distrobox container. That also lets me set a custom home directory so I can have different IDEs set up differently for different languages and with different extensions.
People should make another package format that will be the last package format you ever need to solve the package problem... Then make fifteen more.
The problem is flatpaks dont work well due to permission issues (even with flatseal) and takes up way too much space. Its not ideal
I've never had a single problem using any flatpak application or emulators even before I installed flatseal ( Linux Mint Cinnamon user here since late 2010 ). And NO I didn't have to perform any special tweaks..nor folder permissions adjusting either.
" and takes up way too much space. Its not ideal "
1. How many flatpaks have you installed when you came to that opinion?
2. How much actual space ...TOTAL was consumed by just flatpak applications?
You do realize that they include all the necessary dependencies all in one deal right? And when there are updates... the updates DON'T add to the size of the original flatpak application's space consumption, it replaces necessary to replace things.
There is more to explain, but honestly I'm pretty exhausted from yard work and doing Uber Eats food deliveries and editing the subtitle file of a movie. ..So I'm forgetting what those things could be at the moment.
I don't really agree with your Android comparison. Sure installing apps is done through a store, but if you don't want to use it there's one standard for installing apps .. the APK file. So sure the default on Linux also is a 'store', but then there is the mess of packaging formats if you don't want to use it. So basically Android fixed it, Linux needs to step up. I know what the challenges are, but c'mon why not work together
Well, Android only really offers support for APKs, so it's a format forced by Google which is why it worked. It's a walled garden in this perspective, which Linux is not
@@MichaelNROH though, inadvertently solving it none the less
@@Deezter16 Sure, but if you want a walled garden those already exist in the form of Windows and macOS.
@@russjr08 That's a little black and white isn't it ? The community/developers could come together and come up with a standard it they wanted to.
@@Deezter16 We already have standards, we just have quite a few. There's no way to coerce the whole community into going for a single standard without stripping a way the right for distro maintainers to use what they want - which would be turning it into a walled garden like we already have.
Good!!
You forgot to mention snaps, which can be used for deep system apps and server apps.
Meanwhile my problem is on linux i can't install software easily where i want.
Definitely your worst video so far, sounds like the biased marketing stuff we're used to see from big tech companies. Your description of the Windows installation is deliberately complicated and not representing reality. Who cares whether an installer is .exe or .msi (do those even still exist?), who cares whether files get downloaded directly or over an installer? The process stays the same: download - double click - done.
On Linux fragmentation IS by far its biggest problem, and that exactly is the reason why you can't compare it to Android: Android has exactly ONE installer where you will find ALL programs (ignore Samsung stuff). On Linux you have different distros, different desktops, different packages and different installers - and sometimes you even have to add specific repositories. Therefore every installer will show you different programs. The problem on Linux is not installing an app through an installer, the problem is that every installer will have a different applications available.
Really? 1. You are used to double clicking an executable Windows file.
2. You apparently have used a Linux distro that has a software installer.
3. Sure, installing software via command line is harder on Windows and Linux.
i am animator and tried to enter linux. got afraid of distros. then i studied more and came across these packages and got afraid again as i need to use latest krita kdenlive etc. linux is not as convenient as it seems.
I can handle small packages but when you switching DE they always left some dot files so annoying and if you have long time system lets say you went to gnome then switch to kde after 1 year you want to try agine gnome and boom errors on start conflicts dots files
I can't stand "app store" type installers because they never have what you're looking for. They're nice for things they have, but when I'm looking for Olive Editor and they don't have it i should never have to look at a terminal. I even had ai help me for like 15 minutes, but it wasn't any help. If copy and paste the command, and it would just respond with an error. I really want to switch from Windows
Im watching too many of your videos i should probably subscribe at this point xd
We're all dyingly awaiting your response.
Make a guide on how to auto mount drives and move apps to them.
Hard? Not Really. First out of all the distros there are only 3 roots -- RedHat, Debian, Suse. Each has their on way of handling installs. So that is 3 roots for install. Now to save time, find the features you need and settle on one of the 3 root distros. Like to distro hop? Just stick to one of the roots when you go thru the forks in your hopping and you will know how to do the install. Has worked for over 20yrs for me.
Better yet, roll your own and call it a day.
Na, windows installer is horrible but works. Linux is just a nightmare, if your package manager has old outdated packages (or forcing snaps/flatpaks) which it does especially on debian related distros then you'll have to mess around with third party repo sources or branches that in turn create dependency hell, use terminal instructions to install a portable into opt and its link/desktop file or build the program itself. Devs are simply too lazy to package their own software for all the formats and distros themselves because there are simply too many.
It's p. much the defining reason nobody uses linux actually, every problem whether it's driver incompatibility or software bugs are just symptoms of a lack of understanding for what a normal desktop user wants.
What are you using for implementing OneDrive?
Default Online Accounts. Works pretty well, though I don't really use it
@@MichaelNROH I don't know why but for me the only thing I got when I logged in was the emails.
@@omarashraf27 Maybe it's a personal account? I don't know those.
For some reason my university never cancelled my subscription. Lucky me I guess
@@MichaelNROH I have my university account.
But I didn't try it.
It's indeed personal account.
I'll try the university one.
Mine is still active too.
So, why did you went back to gnome?
Which distro you are using?
Hope there's a how to uninstall video using .deb package.
i tried, i really tried. i still have a endevouros install on another drive, but ffs the linux filesystem is hot garbage for trying to find anything
love your videos, and your accent :D
The video has 666 likes. I don't wanna disturb that
Hear me out. Linux isn't for average people even though many RUclipsrs denies it. If it was, then the would've made it as use friendly as possible like Windows and Mac
Ok show me how to install Cockpit app on many different linux servers tahat are not permission to connect internet (only local network).
0:11 - Bruh
yeah man i use debian but i choose rpm it make sense
My only problem with the flatpacks is the size. Too big for me. Where I live, internet data isn't practically free.
Flatpaks are usually only that big for the first installs, since you need the runtimes. Afterwards it's just the application itself, but I can agree with the initial installation
I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're refering to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.
Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called Linux, and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project.
There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called Linux distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux!
That's not an issue on Arch. Everything is in official repos/AUR. Just use AUR helper like yay. One place to install any program, one command to update everything.
I don't use other distros because I'm too dumb to use all of those different ways to manage programs. Arch is the simplest.
People do this video like every 3 months. With the same complaints that are normally "it doesn't work like Windows". If you don't like choice, don't use an open source OS. Been hearing this now for the past 20 years.
Why wouldn't a user go to the repository first? There's no point in doing a Web search if your distribution has an approved application built-in. That way of thinking is part of what made "windows" such a joke. Unless you need the bleeding-edge version, the repository will install and take care of the dependencies.
Because a user first needs to know of the repository. Same can be said for why people don't just use the Microsoft Store on Windows.
Familiarity and most don't want a new way
"I've always done it that way" doesn't make it a good idea. Whenever I recommend Debian etc., I include an explanation of the repository. The whole package is closer to safe -- not just the OS itself. If you want to be part of the change, you should also make that explanation.
It looks like you're back on gnome
Brother please help.
nvidia kernel module missing falling back to nouveau. This is the major problem,I think everyone is facing in fedora 40. Can't install nvidia drivers.
It might be related to Secure Boot. I haven't touched NVIDIA drivers for a while but there are some reports that the modules are no longer signed.
Try disabling it and see it it is working. If it is, look into "Signing NVIDIA driver on Fedora"
no its not nga
I think so too
yeah same with winget, scoop, etc.. on windows, @@MichaelNROH
What distribution is this one?
Fedora
@@MichaelNROH I loved it mate you've got style!! Also you've got a marvelous community congrats!!
install nix. if it ain't in nix then I'm good
Its easier than windows bruh
Having multiple ways to package apps is awful and there's no excuse for it. That's the one thing Linux does worse than anyone else
That's a general problem unfortunately. Desktop Operating Systems, except Apple have this in common, but are lucky enough to already establish one Standard someone could go with
@@MichaelNROH I'm not sure if I follow, there are indeed multiple packaging ways for apps on Windows, but they all work within the same platform, no matter which you choose. Linux has many, but if you bundle your app as an RPM, there's no running it on a Debian based distro (or maybe there is, but not an obvious one).
Then there's distros packaging applications themselves which is not a good idea, since users are losing in consistency and developers are losing in that they get bug reports for stuff that was fixed 2 versions ago in the case where the distro has a very slow release cycle. This is why the Bottles developers only support their own official build, which is a flatpak.
Now I think snaps and flatpaks are eventually going to address these shortcomings, but things are not there yet. Linux is becoming better and better as a regular user OS, and I'm happy to see it, since Windows is ever becoming worse.
Skill issue
No I disagree .. 99% of things are just as simple as windows to install them. just open the software center search install. only a few things are complicated IMO, things like davinci resolve and such needs major improvement to make installing them simple
One of the few reasons i stick to windows
W
when will people start to use winget instead of downloading software on Windows
Probably never, since it's commands
@@MichaelNROH Windows comes with Dev Home app preinstalled which uses winget graphically or people could use UniGetUI app
@@MichaelNROH on Windows there is Dev Home app preinstalled which uses winget or people could use UniGetUI with winget built in
on Windows there is Dev Home app preinstalled which uses winget or people could use UniGetUI with winget built in
Actually, installing applications on Linux is easier than on windows
I use Linux, but I disagree on the .exe comment. Everything is self-contained to the .exe _(if there are no dll's, etc.)_ and other applications reference acknowledgment of this installation and can be used together _(like drag and drop functionality, etc.)_ with other applications without having to "point to" it or "make it the default," *even if the installed program is moved.*
Appimages _(closest equivalent)_ do not even compare, as you have to edit a menu to place the applications you want in the app launcher or make a shortcut, *and even then if they are moved, the reference(s) to the application(s) do not update.* I don't understand why people are claiming packages are better either when 6/10 times it's being maintained by some random guy and not the people working on it at all. I don't know... It's just a mess all around, I'm just here... 😅
🧢
Windows has the Microsoft Store and Winget. Most software is available this way and should be the preferred method. Downloading installers should be the last resort.
Compared to how many Windows apps there are, the MS store and winget has a horrible small selection of packages.
Linux by comparison has implemented this for way way longer and a lot more stuff is available
@@MichaelNROH give me an example of free software you want to install that is not available through winget. Most everything I use is available.
@@csteelecrs AMD Radeon Software would be a good example. It doesn't come with Windows Update and is also not available via Winget I think. Popular Vendors might have a package up there, but you would be suprised how many requests of obscure software I get from time to time
@@MichaelNROH That’s driver software doesn’t count. You should be very cautious about any obscure software. You should always look for an alternative that is available.
@@csteelecrs Why do the drivers do not count? I will argue that those should be one of the top priorities to get in the store, since they run at the kernel.
Linux doesn't makes your life easy.... It makes your life more complicated 👽
There's no such thing as "installing app on Linux", Linux is not an OS, is just a kernel. you install an app on debian, Gentoo or Android.
Linux is the colloquial term used for Linux kernel based operating systems.
Like how pie is a term for all pie crust based pastries.
Its both socially and commercially acceptable to call Linux based OS, "Linux"
Computer Terminology is different from consumer terminology for a reason.
If you say Debian is an Operating System, then no one knows what it is compatible with
YoU iNsTaLl ApPs On An Os, NoT cOmPuTeR, nO wAy YoU iNsTaLl An ApP tO a PhYsIcAl HaRdWaRe
@@MichaelNROH It's compatible with Debian specific software, and the Debian team states as such.
yeah or LG smartTV webOS. also linux and installing an app there may be totally different
W