Why this is not implemented in consumer-grade GNU/Linux

Why this is not implemented in consumer-grade GNU/Linux yet?
It is much easier to install packages like that...

And why no normal package-managers (like apt or zypper) aren't implemented in macOS

Other urls found in this thread:

support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/1164411#answer-978198
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Same problem different solution
Linux build package with dependency
Mac OS build everything on package

Both are available in either. Windows too.

I disagree. The actual act of dragging an application to a folder called "Applications" is stupid and unintuitive to normies, which necessitates all app developers sprucing up the operation with nice graphics and shortcuts like you see in your screenshot.

It also doesn't work very well at all for software that comes with multiple binaries, or software that is expected to be used at the command line, or software that would normally give you options about what specific features you wanted out of the box on installation. Worse, software distributed like this often doesn't come with an actual uninstaller, which leaves random crap on your drive when you delete the app so you have to pay for something like AppZapper to MAYBE get rid of it for good.

Windows got installing and uninstalling third party software almost 100% right the first time, only needing tweaks afterwards to standardize uninstallers and force programs to not save data in Program Files. Just fucking do what Windows does. The end.

What's even going on here?

>huge vulnerability found in library X
>library X quickly releases a fix

>MacOS
>majority of apps go unpatched
>miraculously a dev gives a fuck
>recompiles app with patched library X
>releases new version on their website which most of their users don't download
>430MB

>Linux
>library X updated in distribution's package manager
>library X has an update! 100 KB
>total upgade size: -0.05 KB

How to make folder-application in GNU/Linux (or simply Linux as I started to call it recently) like it is made on macOS.
And how to make homebrew on macOS as great, as typical distro repo.
Linux does it, but cooler, because all is unified (ex. sudo apt-get install someshit/code], sudo apt-get remove someshit/code]) but without normal GUI... Usually. OpenSUSE features OK GUI for it.
Dependencies can be compared with VC-redistr and DX and .NET.

And for me installing via drop-to-a-folder makes more sense, because in old times it was enough to copy program folder to a floppy, and copy it back to hard-drive. The similar thing is done on Mac, but prettier and more idiot-proof

Static linking is actually superior to dynamic linking in every sense, and there's no good reason for Linux to use dynamic linking - regardless of what software installation or package management mechanism it uses.

Fuck, I've fucked it all up.
Linux does it, but cooler, because all is unified (ex. sudo apt-get install someshit[/code], sudo apt-get remove someshit[/code]) but without normal GUI... Usually. OpenSUSE features OK GUI for it.
Dependencies can be compared with VC-redistr and DX and .NET.

And for me installing via drop-to-a-folder makes more sense, because in old times it was enough to copy program folder to a floppy, and copy it back to hard-drive. The similar thing is done on Mac, but prettier and more idiot-proof

...

Last one is at least readable.

whatever you say pajeet

Dynamic linking is wonderful and I prefer it, but it's got a big disadvantage:
>library X updates with a breaking change to API
>user updates packages on system
>any number of applications which depended on that library now broken for user

99% of mac users dont even know where or what happens when they drag and drop

Packages have explicit deps on library packages. Youre able to have multiple shared library package versions.

Normies use App stores, imotbqh

Not quite true. And 'app stores' in Linux are not that attractive, but MUCH easier to use.

surely there's slow progress being made

But you save space by reusing dependencies rather than by having every program repackage them all.

agreed, but what does that have to do with dependencies? dependencies aren dynlibs only

Because installing random shit from the internet is dangerous. Package managers are the main reason Linux doesn't get viruses, not any sort of "magic" or hardening

it's only unintuitive because you've been trained that the way to install software is to:

1. find it's installer file somewhere on the internet
download the file
2. go to the location where you downloaded the file (web browsers have had to implement solutions to this problem that shouldn't even exist)
3. run the installer file
4. answer all of it's questions that it should already know the answers to anyway
5. make sure not to install anything you don't want, such as shitware
6. REBOOT YOUR COMPUTER LMAO, registry based OS's are retarded
7. finally, hope it put a launcher icon where you can find it, otherwise you have to now find the program if you don't remember where you installed it
and if you didn't make any errors in those seven (7) steps, then maybe you can use the software as long as it doesn't require any dependencies such as .NET or Java, or QT. If it does, then you have to repeat the process for said dependencies, good job

macs are dynamically linked mostly, because we are all on the same system

actually that's 8 steps, i forgot to number download the file

THIS. Its literally my MAIN killer point for getting normies irl off winblows. No one does application installation worse than windows. Fucking people have 15 updaters running on start up, one for each major software package they have installed.

>Worse, software distributed like this often doesn't come with an actual uninstaller, which leaves random crap on your drive when you delete the app
You don't know the unix file system very well do you, user?

>so you have to pay for something like AppZapper to MAYBE get rid of it for good.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

>not writing a shell script that takes an application name as a parameter and deletes the references to that app from all of the known locations where macOS reliably stores that information, but also as a failsafe checks for any other references and asks before deleting those as well

but you probably thought us mac users were just a bunch of plebs and cucks

Using a screenshot of an older version of Mac OS or using a very outdated version of Mac OS

That looks like Anything from 10.5 to 10.9

Install:
sudo pacman -S stuff
Uninstall:
sudo pacman -R stuff

And before you say
> but normies can't do this
I remember you that the actual children know more about computers than you at their age.
Command line is a lazy filter, but once you learned it, GUI is handicapped

Sounds like a problem with GNOME and GTK
Just use Qt masterrrace

The problem with this is how you do when you are offline? on windows has the big advantage of intalling easy and be done with it but in linux how? how do you update or install something? there is some way but is inconvenient has fuck

Dynamic applications have better user experience. Nobody cares about your legacy garbage.

sudo pacman -U stuff.tar.gz

And better than that, once you:
sudo pacman -Syu
You update **all** the packages of your PC, you don't have to manually search for them

> implying OS X doesn't leave residue files everywhere when you delete the .app

uninstallers sometimes remove these files, deleting the .app NEVER removes these files.

how you do that offline?

Appcleaner is as free as beer though.

pacman-offline in the AUR

This is the most asinine retarded way to install software, fucking dmgs that you have to remove afterwards plus the fact that you have to drag it like its some innovative way of installing makes this the most idiotic thing i have seen in a mac, and honestly if you think that this is a good way you really just need to shoot yourself in the head and die you piece of shit. Or better yet "drag" the gun to your "head" folder

This. Static linking is superior.

> gatekeeper
> random shit
Pick one.

10.7 and up didn't have that button on the right side of the title bar.

>why isn't [retarded normalfag cancer] part of gnu/linux
You have to understand that in learning how to be able to implement some dumb idea, you learn other things along the way and often come out of it realizing how silly and based in misconceptions said idea was.
When retards in droves want to throw their money at devs to get stupid things and bad ideas implemented, I'm sure they'll find plenty happy to oblige - Until then, they do it for free, which means they're doing it for themselves, which means they're not going to waste their precious free time on something they've discovered to be retarded or pointless.

The only reason why people even consider package managers difficult is because they are CLI based and they have an irrational fear of the terminal, even then GUI frontends like Synaptic and GNOME Software exist.

>windows got it right
Fuck off. Windows suffers from the same problems, if not worse than macOS. If you remove a program using any uninstaller. 99.99% of the time it'll leave data inside of multiple appdata folders.

>package gets added to repo
>gets malicious code added
>malware is unnoticeable
>other packages become dependent on it

or

>the year is 2XXX
>there are multiple packages with similar or the same name
>can't specify or distinguish

>want to install program
>open terminal
>type yaourt
>pick any variant you want and press enter
>it can install anything, open source, proprietary, 3rd party, configs, multiple binaries
>they update whenever you want it along with the system - no need for 20 notifications "new java version is available!"
Why do they have to keep coming up with new innovative methods, when perfection already exists.

This has literally never happened
>inb4 systemd

Maybe it hasn't happened yet, but it theoretically can happen.

no, it can't. packages are GPG signed.

however, it has happened on windows and mac multiple times (ccleaner)

Elementary has Eddy, that does just that.

Firefox is 'unzip' and run on gnu/linux
support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/1164411#answer-978198

>macs are dynamically linked mostly, because we are all on the same system
This is simply untrue.

Copy appimages to folder, install appimaged. Same shit isnt it? Mac Style faggyness on Linux