42
Is PopOS better than Ubuntu?
(programming.dev)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 24 Jun 2024
42 points (88.9% liked)
Asklemmy
43728 readers
1358 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Biggest difference between Ubuntu and Pop is that Ubuntu aims to popularise usage of snap and uses apt as a backup option while Pop aims to deliver its software through apt and flatpaks, in the priority that the user wants.
Flatpaks are more consistent to run, they can run between all distros but install dependencies seperately so could take up more space for installations.
Apt makes use of the native debian installation, which works well for most but sometimes you could be stuck in a dependency hell between some software. Uses the storage more efficiently as it can share dependencies between multiple installed packages.
Snap sucks. There's literally no point in using it. It can run apps on all distros similarly to flatpak but its worse in every possible way. It hits noticably to run time of applications.
Both are massive security risks.
Carry on.
Clarify?