Readit NewsThe fundamental problem is that AppImages are literally just an archive with a bunch of files in them, including libraries and other expected system files. These files have to be selected by the developer. It's really hard to tell which libraries can be expected to exist on every distribution, which libraries you can bundle and which ones you absolutely cannot due to dependence on some system component you can't bundle either, or things like mesa/graphics drivers. There's tools to help developers with this, "linuxdeploy" is one, but they're not perfect. Every single AppImage tutorial will tell you: Test the AppImage on every distribution you intend this to run on.
At the end of the day, this situation burdens both the developer (have I tested every distribution my users will use? both LTS and non-LTS?) as well as the user (what is this weird error? why isn't it working on my system?), and even if this all somehow works, newer versions of distributions are not guaranteed to work.
Flatpak, for all its bells and whistles, at least provides one universal guarantee: Whatever the developer tests, is exactly what the user will experience. I think this is a problem that needed solving for many people.
...it hurts a lot to say this as a longtime flatpak avoider, still always prefer distribution packaging, but I've come to accept that there's a genuine utility to flatpak, if only to cover for letting users test different versions of software easily, and similar situations that distributions just cannot facilitate no matter how fancy their package manager.
Sure you can do it with Pdftk (or stapler these days), and a mish-mash of pdfinfo, Imagemagick and so on but the GUI programs mostly seem pretty bad offerings considering they're a fairly thin shell around library operations.
There are many issues with FreeCAD being OSS alternative to professional MCAD software, but UI/UX is not one of them
When will the users learn that SaaS means the software can change at any time out of your control, up to and including not functioning at all, and you will not be able to do anything about it?
Or will their minds continue to be "clouded" by the corporate propaganda?
I think the question of why people will willingly "build on a shaky foundation" is appropriate, especially given the type of software this is.
Many Fusion users have switched to alternative CAD programs in last year or two. Many of them started using Alibre products, which have quite good pricing (Atom is great choice for hobby users/small workshops). Too bad it's Windows only (like almost all CAD programs). But I think FreeCAD also increased their user-base, which will hopefully help them grow (like Blender). It's really great software, but still missing some features needed for (more) professional work.
It's hard for companies to move to another CAD software, but some companies are really pushing their users away :D