• 1995ToyotaCorolla@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    I mean, can’t you just package your app in flatpack or even snap? Bam, your app works on 99% of distributions for little effort. That’s what Spotify does, and I’d argue they have even less incentive to support Linux than proton does

    • helenslunch@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      I don’t know, I’m not a developer. Lots of companies don’t make their products available on Linux, most cite similar reasoning, so it’s unsurprising. But I agree it’s disappointing. I really wish Linux was more user-friendly.

    • セリャスト@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      He also answered this claim, it is right for apps that aren’t stuff like Proton VPN that can’t work in a sandboxed environment. They are working on it iirc

    • cley_faye@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Sure, as long as you don’t need any integration with other software, don’t need arbitrary IPC, and actually keep some dependencies in line with some common denominator because there’s only so much you can do with static linking (oh excuse me, distributing the shared libraries in the same package as your binaries as if it’s a new thing) once it reach the “program must actually run” part.

      Flatpack and every other similar solution that are described as “works everywhere” always come with a heck of limitations.