Flatpak vs Snap

Flatpak and Snap are two competing universal packaging formats for Linux that aim to solve a long-standing problem: the fragmentation of application distribution across different Linux distributions. Traditionally, software packaged for Ubuntu (as a .deb file) would not work on Fedora (which uses .rpm), and applications often required different builds for different distribution versions due to varying library versions. Both Flatpak and Snap address this by bundling applications with their dependencies in isolated containers that run consistently across distributions.

Snap was created by Canonical, the company behind Ubuntu. Snap packages are distributed through the Snap Store, which is the centralized and sole repository for Snaps. This is one of the most controversial aspects of the format: the Snap Store backend is proprietary and controlled exclusively by Canonical, meaning there is no way to host an alternative Snap repository. Snap packages are managed by the snapd daemon, which handles installation, updates, sandboxing, and automatic background updates. Snaps are designed to work for a wide range of software, including desktop applications, server software, command-line tools, and even IoT device firmware.

Flatpak was developed as a community project, originally under the umbrella of the freedesktop.org initiative, with significant contributions from Red Hat. Unlike Snap, Flatpak's architecture is decentralized -- anyone can host a Flatpak repository. In practice, Flathub has emerged as the dominant repository, hosting thousands of applications and serving as the de facto app store for many Linux distributions. Flatpak focuses specifically on desktop applications and uses a runtime system where applications share common libraries through shared runtimes (such as the GNOME or KDE runtime), reducing duplication and download sizes.

Sandboxing and security differ between the two formats. Both use Linux kernel features like namespaces and cgroups for isolation. Flatpak uses a portal system through xdg-desktop-portal to mediate access to host resources like files, printing, and screen sharing, giving users fine-grained control over what an application can access. Snap uses AppArmor profiles for confinement. In practice, many applications in both formats request broad permissions, and the effective security of sandboxing depends heavily on how well the application has been adapted to work within the constraints.

Performance characteristics differ notably. A common criticism of Snap packages is slower startup times, particularly on the first launch, because Snap packages are distributed as compressed SquashFS images that must be mounted and decompressed. Flatpak applications generally start faster because their files are stored in a deduplicated, uncompressed OSTree repository. Snap's automatic background update mechanism can also cause periodic slowdowns as snapd checks for and applies updates, though this ensures applications stay current without user intervention.

Distribution adoption has been a key battleground. Ubuntu ships with Snap support by default and has replaced some system packages (including Firefox) with Snap versions. Linux Mint, despite being Ubuntu-based, has controversially blocked Snap and ships Flatpak support instead. Fedora, openSUSE, and many other distributions include Flatpak by default or make it easy to install. Most major distributions can support both formats, but the default choice influences what most users encounter.

AppImage deserves mention as a third approach. AppImage packages are self-contained executable files that require no installation -- users simply download the file, make it executable, and run it. There is no daemon, no central store, and no sandboxing by default. This simplicity is appealing for distribution by application developers who want a single downloadable file, but the lack of centralized updates and security isolation limits its appeal for system-wide software management.

The broader trend points toward Flatpak gaining momentum as the preferred format for desktop Linux applications, driven by Flathub's growing catalog and adoption by multiple distributions. Snap maintains its strength in the Ubuntu ecosystem and for server and IoT use cases that Flatpak does not target. For desktop Linux users, the practical advice is straightforward: use whichever format your distribution supports best, and if both are available, choose based on application availability, startup performance, and your preferences regarding centralized versus decentralized infrastructure. For those who value the principle that no single company should control the distribution channel for Linux software, Flatpak's decentralized architecture and community governance offer a more independent path forward.

Ubuntu, RedHat, AppImage