> In my experience people respond better when you actually explain and provides arguments to why you think “package management is a stupid way to manage applications” and not simply say this blanket statement.

I have done this many times on HN, and it almost universally results in downvoting.

> Now I would love to hear your arguments and, maybe, change my mind.

Fine, whatever. I don't need the fake internet points. Let me start by saying my complaints here are specifically in regards to the way Linux packages, repos, and managers work to avoid someone from Haiku showing up to tell me I'm wrong:

- Repos are no better than walled gardens except that they are typically maintained by unpaid third parties

- Said unpaid third parties sometimes introduce bugs or arbitrary changes to the software

- You can't install applications to different disks or have multiple versions of the same application

- Copying applications from one computer to another is massively complicated because most package managers never consider this use case at all

- Package managers encourage the kind of interdependency hell and reliance on fixed paths that makes them necessary in the first place

- The proliferation of package formats and package managers has made packaging binaries for Linux an incredible pain in the ass

To address your points specifically:

> - you have to trust many more parties than a single repository;

This is true even in the repo world. You have to trust the developer of the application and the maintainer of the package for that repo at the very least. There is no reason someone cannot curate a repository of software that is not managed by and tied to a package manager and, in fact, there are many of these to choose from.

> - you incentivize people to do unsafe things like running downloaded exes from sites;

Yes, but I think that speaks to a failure of non-mobile OSs to implement proper application sandboxing once the internet became the dominant distribution medium for applications. I also think this threat is given far too much weight in comparison to being constrained in your choice of software.

> - now you need to also trust that no one tampered with the websites and have to manually checksum and verify authenticity of each application whereas a good package manager should do this for you;

Yes. Again, I don't think this is a big deal, especially when compared to restricting my choice in software. The thing I think makes personal computers valuable is that people can install pretty much whatever they want, make their own stuff, and easily pass it around. Package management and repos overcomplicates this.

> - Removing applications without package managers is a worse experience.

Only under "installer/uninstaller" paradigms. "Portable Applications" in Windows, or Application Bundles on Mac or NeXT, or the original Macintosh's single-file applications, or RiscOS AppDirs, or even DOS's buncha-files-ina-folder paradigm make removing an application as simple as deleting a single object. Not to mention they make copying or moving applications, or running them on different media, as trivial as any file operation.

I probably won't change your mind as a lot of this is subjective, equally your arguments do not sway me. Suffice it to say, the Linux community agrees with you, and that is part of the reason I don't want to use Linux.