The initial comment said that they didn’t like that Ubuntu is owned by a company.

Content note: shilling

!https://frame.work/!<

Tellico

This (well, with alt) has been a standard thing in x11 for decades. KDE kept it (with meta) when it added a Wayland backend to kwin.

The first desktop that I used on Linux was GNOME, probably either 2.0 or 2.2. It was a bit clunky, but it was fine. I distro hopped for a while and discovered Mandrake 9 and thought the desktop was great. This was when I discovered desktop environments. I hopped over to Fedora Core when it was first released and was unhappy with the desktop again.

So I started desktop hopping on Fedora. I tried XFCE, Fluxbox, Openbox, and several others. They were cool, and the KDE experience on Fedora Core 1 was not great. At some point I switched to Gentoo and used the KDE experience there. When Ubuntu came around, I found that while the install experience was good, the desktop was kinda clunky. I ended up sticking with Gentoo. When Kubuntu 5.04 came out, though, I switched over. And I’ve been using some combination of Kubuntu and KDE Neon ever since.

If GNOME had been my only option, I probably would have gone back to Windows. Initially because I found it clunky (and tbh kinda ugly), but more recently because every time I’ve used GNOME in the last decade or so, it feels like it’s lost features I used heavily. Meanwhile KDE has taken a different approach to configurability of trying to cut down configuration options by figuring out what a better option that everyone can agree on looks like. It’s still very configurable, but it has nowhere near as many knobs as it had in the KDE 3.5 days. You know what, though? I cannot think of a single lost configuration option in Plasma that I miss.

So I am strongly in the KDE Korner between these two, and much more weakly favour KDE Plasma vs. other desktops.

Personally I have no issues with a corporate backed distro. My point is that if someone doesn’t want a corporate owned distro, PopOS doesn’t fit the bill.

Not sure why you specify binary-based OS’s. Following Gentoo’s upgrade guide also gets you potentially whatever they want on your systemp

Yes! In fact, Chromium was originally a fork of WebKit, as WebKit was a fork of KHTML. In both cases the codebases have diverged quite significantly though.

The core of Safari (WebKit) is open source. If it weren’t they’d be violating the GPL license of KHTML.

Kubuntu, because it’s the most solid distro I’ve used that meets my needs.

It may surprise you to see how many Debian contributors are doing so on Canonical’s payroll.

Isn’t Pop OS just System76’s spin on Ubuntu?

They don’t really compete. Dark table does image processing, whereas Digikam’s major strength is its library organization.

In Python it’s really hard!

def __eq__(self, other):
    ...

How do you even write those subscripted hyphens???

That link includes a whole lot of old things as well as blog posts about how they sped up the performance of the Firefox snap, after which there doesn’t seem to be much, if any, further evidence of the snap being slow.

The claim that snaps are a Canonical NIH thing is falsified by those two facts. Even if Canonical said “okay, we’ll distribute desktop apps with Flatpak,” that wouldn’t affect the vast majority of their ongoing effort for snaps, which are related to things that Flatpak simply doesn’t do. Instead, they’d have the separate work of making the moving target of flatpaks work with their snap-based systems such as Ubuntu Core while still having to fully maintain that snap based ecosystem for the enterprise customers who use it for things that Flatpak simply doesn’t do.

Good thing grep exists!

I don’t like snaps because it’s just another Canonical NIH thing. Everyone else agreed on flatpak which seems to have a good design with portals and all and being fully open.

Snaps both predate flatpak and do things that Flatpaks are not designed to do.

Canonical have also been a part of the desktop portals standard for a very long time, as they’ve been a part of how snaps do things.

Are they though? They were at one point, but even then I’ve not seen comparative slowness compared to the equivalent Flatpaks. In some cases I’ve seen them be slow compared to native packages, but even that seems to have all but disappeared for me.

Flatpak has long had the ability to dump the contents of a snap into it, because snaps had already solved many of the build issues flatpaks were struggling with and they used similar runtimes for their sandboxing. It’s also a convenient way to convert apps over, since many apps got packaged as snaps before flatpak was really usable.