Re: Snap is a single compressed file,
"Even embedded SBCs can afford to burn through a few extra gigs if it makes them more reliable and robust."
But do they actually need that many 9s of reliability?
Sure, bespoke systems (spacecraft & etc.) might need this. But your average linux desktop/set-top-box/telephone/SBC? Total overkill.
Shirley at this point we are well past the point of diminishing returns in what is a general purpose operating system.
This 19ish year old HP laptop has never crashed, never lost a byte of data, never been compromised, with no issues updating and installing new software. Slackware 10.0 -stable on ext3 when new, moved to ext4 with slack13.1 in 2010, still on ext4 today running slack15.0 (flirted with reiserfs briefly around slack12.1) ... all without any OS or program related issues.[0][1]
From my perspective, not a single one of these new ideas seems to have a compelling case for inclusion FOR THE VAST MAJORITY OF USE CASES. And yet, here we are. Wasting system resources for no good reason. (Other than the pervasive "it's there, we must fill it!" of the Lost Redmond Generations.)
Unless the companies pushing this kind of thing have ulterior motives, of course. My guess is that it's a control issue... and not the user's control of his own hardware, either.
[0] I have replaced/upgraded the HDD, battery and RAM over the years. She was built just before the second round of bad caps at HP.
[1] I fully expect this old laptop to dissolve into a lump of slag after typing that for all the world to read ... but I have known good backups, multiple fall-over boxen, and the ol' gal doesn't owe me a dime. I'll shed a tear, raise a glass and give her a decent burial when the inevitable happens.