You’re a company and your software actually runs on Linux. You want to reach as many people as possible. So you make a .deb for Ubuntu. Or you go with a package manager that is cross-distro.
That’s why.
That’s why.
So flatpak?
Those of us using immutable distros would love a "flatpack for cli utils". OS-tree layering defeats many of the points of immutability, and pet containers are a bigger pita than they should be. There has to be a better way.
But just to strongman package managers:
With an AppImage you don't get security updates, and it isn't a distribution mechanism.
Not everything is network connected and security critical. Auto-updates are a huge pain for a lot of workflows.
I don't have any gross snaps or unpackaged stuff on my laptop, how could I expect paying customers, with an operations department, to accept anything less.
This is a reductive argument.
It's not more effort if Snap is already included in the Linux distribution.
This argument only applies if Snap is your only distribution channel.
Otherwise, you could say that distributing a Linux version of the software implies more effort from the user, because they'd need to install Linux first. We're talking alternatives here.