This time I want to discuss the results of monitoring software that I run from the appimage package and from installation by default using apt.
The first experiment using Krita appimage and from the installation using apt.
In this experiment, both use Krita 4.17. And this is data obtained from the system monitor when running both software in the idle state.
 |
| APT |
 |
| Appimage |
From the two images, the difference in computer resource use is not far adrift and I consider there is no significant difference in resource use.
The second experiment uses MuseScore from Appimage and installation apt.
 |
| APT |
 |
| Appimage |
In the second experiment using MuseScore, I got data like in the picture above !. There is a slight difference in memory usage and CPU (although not significant) when running MuseScore in idle state.
I wrote this article, because I was curious when there was a comment that Appimage was heavier than installing by default on Ubuntu. In this experiment, I used a laptop with an SSD, 4 GB RAM, and a dual core processor.
I retrieve data from running krita until idle. And from the data obtained, the results when running Krita between appimage and apt, didn't have a significant difference.
Some blogs like Verummeum also post comparative articles between appimage, flatpak, and snap. there are some differences from the results of the data obtained by the system monitor.
