You can already run Linux apps using Termux and Termux-X11, and I'd say the performance would be better than this demo, because this is running in a virtual machine and uses it's own kernel, whereas with Termux you're running your apps directly on top of the Android Linux kernel. Also, you don't have the overhead of running ChromeOS on top of Android.

Because:

The DistroWatch Page Hit Ranking statistics are a light-hearted way of measuring the popularity of Linux distributions and other free operating systems among the visitors of this website. They correlate neither to usage nor to quality and should not be used to measure the market share of distributions. They simply show the number of times a distribution page on DistroWatch was accessed each day, nothing more.

So people see it on the list and click on it wondering "what the heck is this MX Linux thing". And that boosts the ranking. And now that it's at the top, it attracts more curious clicks, thus it continues to remain on top.

This is my my phone running Debian with XFCE:

I'm a Flatpak user myself, but a lot of those arguments against AppImage are outdated or invalid. Here are my counterpoints:

Usability issues

GearLever solves all the problems mentioned.

Updates

There are AppImages out there that self-update , but GearLever also solves the update issue. And if you don't want to use GearLever, there are other updaters like AppImageUpdate.

The lack of repositories
Appimages don't even have a central place where you can find them, not to mention download them.

This is blatantly wrong - AppImageHub exists for this very reason. There are also GUI frontends like AppImagePool which makes it easy to discover/download/install them.

Lack of Sandboxing

That is a fair point, however, AppImage never claimed to be a sandboxing solution, and for some use-cases this can even be seen as an advantage (any Flatpak user would've at some point run into annoying sandboxing limitations - such as password manager and browser integration, or themeing woes). But there are other sandboxing options out there, such as using containers, and IMO, using a proper container is a better option for sandboxing. Or even better, use a VM if you're actually running an untrusted app.

Random location
[..] A necessary step would be mounting the entire /home non-executable. This is no problem for system apps, or Flatpaks, but where do you put Appimages now?

There would need to be a standard directory to put such files in, which is normally the PATH. But this is also the easiest attack goal for malware, so PATH would be non-executable as well.

I completely disagree with making the entirety of /home as non-executable, when $HOME/.local/bin is recommended by the XDG standard as a place to store executables. As long as $HOME/.local/bin is in the XDG spec, I'll continue storing my executables there. If you disagree, go argue with the XDG guys.

Duplicated libraries

This is a fair point but "they include all the libraries they need" is the entire point of AppImage - so mentioning this is pointless.

If users would really install every Software as Appimages, they would waste insane amounts of storage space.

Then it's a good thing that they don't right? What's the point of making hypothetical arguments? Also, this is 2024, storage is cheap and dedicating space for your applications isn't really a big deal for most folks. And if storage space is really a that much of a concern, then you wouldn't be using Flatpak either - so this argument is moot and only really valid for a hypothetical / rare use-cases where storage is a premium. And again, in such a use case, that user wouldn't be using Flatpaks either.

Finally, some distros like Bazzite already have the above integrations built-in (GearLever/AppImagePool), so you don't even need to do anything special to get AppImages integrated nicely in your system, and there's nothing stopping other distros adding these packages as optional dependencies - but it's kinda moot at this point I guess since Flatpak has already won the war.

Personally, I'm pro-choice. If AppImage doesn't work for you, then don't use it, as simple as that. Stop dictating user choice. If AppImage is really as bad as you claim, then it'll die a natural death and you don't have to worry about it. What you really need to worry about is Snap, which has the backing of Canonical, and some dev houses new to the Linux ecosystem seem to think packing stuff as Snap is an acceptable solution...

matching other programs and platforms

Actually, Ctrl+C is the interrupt hotkey for pretty much every CLI app/terminal on every platform. Try it within the Command Prompt/PowerShell/Windows Terminal, or the macOS terminal - they'll all behave the same.

The use of Ctrl+C as an interrupt/termination signal has a very long history even predating the old UNIX days and DEC - it goes back to the days of early telecommunications, where control characters were used for controlling the follow of data through telecommunication lines. These control characters, along with regular characters, were transmitted by being encoded in binary, and this encoding scheme was defined by ASCII (American Stanard Code for Information Interchange), published in 1963.

In ASCII, the control character ETX (meaning end-of-text; represented by the hex code 0x03) was used to indicate "this segment of input is over", or "stop the current processing".

Now what does all this have to do with with Ctrl+C you ask?

For that, you'll need to go back to the days of early keyboards. Keyboards back then generated ASCII codes directly, and when a modifier key (Ctrl/Shift/Meta) on a keyboard was pressed in combination with another key, it modified the signal sent by the keyboard to produce a control character.

Specifically, pressing Ctrl with a letter key made the keyboard clear (set to zero) the upper three bits of the binary code of the letter, thus effectively mapping the letter keys to control characters (0x00 - 0x1F: the first 32 characters on the ASCII table).

• The ASCII code for 'C' is 0x43 (binary 01000011).
• Pressing Ctrl+C clears the upper three bits, resulting in 00000011, which is 0x03 in hex.

And would you look at that, 0x03 is the code which represents the control character ETX.

The use of ETX to interrupt a program in digital computers was first adopted by the TOPS-10 OS, which ran on DEC's PDP-10 computer, back in the late 60s. It's successor, TOPS-20 also included it, followed by the RSX-11 (on the PDP-11), and VMS (on the VAX-11).

RSX-11 was a very influential OS, created by a team that included David Cutler. It influenced the design of several OSes that followed, such as VMS and Windows NT. Cutler later moved to Microsoft and became the father of Windows NT. Early NT did not include a GUI, so it was natural to adopt existing terminal operation standards, including the use of ETX. In fact, NT's internals were so similar to VMS that a lawsuit was in the works, but instead, MS agreed to pay off DEC millions of $$$.

Also, when UNIX first came out (1969), it ran on DEC hardware, and so they followed the tradition of using the ETX signal to stop programs. This convention flowed to BSD (1978) which was based on UNIX, and NeXTSTEP (1989), which was based on BSD. NeXTSTEP was developed by NeXT Computers, which was founded by Steve Jobs... and the rest is history.

Therefore, Ctrl+C is something that's deeply rooted in history. You don't just simply change something like that. Sure, you may be able to remap the keybindings, but it's actually hardcoded into many programs so you'll run into inconsistencies - that is, if you used the standard remapping tools built into GNOME/KDE etc.

If you want to truly remap Ctrl+C, you'll want to do so at a lower level (evdev layer) so that it's not intercepted by other programs, eg using tools like evremap or keyd. But even then, it's not guaranteed to work everywhere, for instance, if you're inside a VM or using a different OS, or in a remote session. So it's best to remap the keys at the keyboard layer itself, which is possible on many popular mechanical keyboards using customisable firmware like QMK/VIA.

If you were looking for answers to such questions 10 years ago, your best resource for finding a thorough, expert-informed response likely would have been one of the most interesting and longest-lasting corners of the internet: Quora.

I disagree, the best place for such answers used to be Reddit, and Stack Exchange for the techy stuff. Quora always felt like cancer for some reason and I never really used it.

Just so you're aware, Gitea was taken over by a for-profit company. Which is why it was forked and Forgejo was formed. If you don't use Github as a matter of principle, then you should switch to Forgejo instead.

private

If it's on the public facing internet, it's not private.

Why don't laptops have proper low power states

Actually, they do, it's called the "S0" low power state, and it's part of the ACPI standard. Microsoft calls this "Modern Standby" in Windows (and "suspend to idle" in Linux) , and it's pitched to do exactly what you've described.

The only problem is, the implementation sucks. Most users actually hate the S0 state because it consumes so much power - on some laptops, even the fans may continue to run on S0, and your laptop may overheat if you've closed the lid and chucked it in a bag, and it's in the S0 state.

Also, because Microsoft and Intel have been pushing this so much, the "standby" mode now defaults to S0 instead of S3 (which is full suspend-to-RAM). So many users actually actively seek to disable S0 and go back to proper S3 standby, via registry hacks etc.

So why is S0 so bad? Part of this is due to the limitations, long history and the variable nature of the x86 platform. All the power-saving stuff was implemented as an after-thought - both at the hardware and software levels. Whereas ARM, at least the modern ARM ecosystem, was developed with mobile usage and power saving from ground up. An x86 PC is also made up of components from disjointed manufacturers, and we need all those components to implement the same standards so that it all works well as expected. So for instance, if a particular component isn't capable of entering a low-power or active standby state, then it won't - and you can't do much about that, unless you're Apple and have a tight control over the ecosystem.

The second half of the problem comes with the software. All applications must be modern standby / S0 aware, if not, one of two things will happen: that app will keep the system awake, or the app will get suspended by the Desktop Activity Moderator (DAM). Either way, the app must be capable of running in the DRIPS phase (deepest idle runtime platform state), which rules out most Win32 apps (basically almost every app that's not on the Microsoft Store).

Finally, the reality is that most PC users don't care about modern standby regardless - and why should they, when they've all got smartphones, which handles notifications well? Also, hardly anyone does large file downloads these days, and the people who do still download, wouldn't care about doing it while on battery (and if they do, they can take manual actions to lower the power consumption, such as switching to a power saving plan and turning off the display etc).

Ultimately, most people would expect a laptop to go into a fully suspended state when the lid so closed and they're on battery, because if they're on battery the #1 concern for them would be the battery life. So most people actively seek to disable S0 and see it as a hindrance.

Not exactly a story, but a picture thread on Reddit where a guy posts a photo of his tattoos on his arms, and someone goes "how did you take this picture", so he posts a selfie showing him balancing a phone on his shoulder, and someone replies "wait how did you take that picture" and then he posts a photo of him taking a photo of him taking a photo... and this continues until he reveals multiple complex camera setups. Such a legendary thread.

Edit: here it is: https://imgur.com/gallery/JThDN

Over-reliance on proprietary, closed-source products and services from megacorporations.

For instance, it's really absurd that people in many parts of the world cannot function without WhatsApp, they can't even imagine a life without it. It seems absurd that Meta literally has them by the balls, and these people can't do anything about it.

Also the people who base their entire careers on say Adobe or Microsoft products, they're literally having their lives dictated by one giant corporation, which is very depressing and dystopian.

That's actually a good thing IMO, Microsoft is giving people more reasons to switch to Linux. How kind of them!