The problem people have with Snap is that it's basically a fiefdom run by Canonical. Canonical's repo is effectively the only one, they get to choose which software gets to be unsandboxed and which doesn't, and updates are forced. People don't like it because it is Microsoftian in its user hostility.
Maybe you don’t remember the software industry in the 90s when Microsoft was at the peak of their power. Nobody had heard of app stores but MS showed the world what a tech bully is. Putting profit over customer happiness, because they could.
> Maybe you don’t remember the software industry in the 90s
I very much do. Software was sold in boxes in independent store chains. Sure, MS abused their position whenever they could, but their various attempts at building appstores they could control never really succeeded, the best they could do is abusing OEMs to preload this or that crapware.
Apple, on the other hand, defined the market for walled-garden mobile appstores, with all their orwellian warts and obscene profiteering. But unlike with nerdy, cut-throat and business-y MS, "the public" loved their hip image and let them get away with it.
MS clearly sabotaged Dr. Dos. Microsoft was notorious for announcing a competitor to a product (which was vapor), then buying out the now-struggling competitor and releasing that as their new product.
Apple did the same with Sherlock (it's even a verb).
But Microsoft had a monopoly (confirmed by a long federal antitrust lawsuit), and Apple did not, so Microsoft rightly gets the blame.
Apple has an unofficial monopoly on the mobile market, one they are so keen to protect that they kick out developers who don't agree with their draconian policies - only to then grant some of their wishes to others because the restrictions are clearly monopolistic in nature (the Epic Games saga).
Honestly, I'm all for throwing stones at Microsoft, but when it comes to appstores in particular Apple clearly are the most masterfully evil of them all.