Consider taking a look at this criminally underrated Linux-first vendor: NovaCustom. Prices aren’t cheap, unfortunate. But it boasts hardware from about a year ago. Furthermore, NovaCustom takes Libre very seriously: from supporting coreboot to offering blob-free WiFi-cards.

No worries fam. And thanks for clarifying! With that clarification, I think I’ve found what has caused the confusion for me.

Bazzite, even if it’s ultimately derived from Fedora, is actually not closely related to (‘traditional’) Fedora, but instead to Fedora Atomic.

Most of the people that have been recommending Fedora, actually meant the non-Atomic variants. And while this might seem minor, which arguably it is, it is important to be conscious of this distinction.

(‘Traditional’) Fedora behaves a lot like most other distros. Fedora Atomic, instead, introduces a new paradigm. Bazzite goes all-in on this new model and we might even refer to it as next-gen (if you will). Though, it’s important to mention that the next-gen part is only true within the context of Fedora. This is because Fedora has been the only distro to have clearly pronounced their ambitions in this direction. They even reiterated this in their Fedora Strategy 2028 and I quote: “Objective: Immutable variants are the majority of Fedora Linux in use”. (Note that atomic is a rebranding of immutable)

So, within the context of Fedora, even if I don’t see the traditional model being sunset anytime soon, the atomic variants do seem more promising in terms of longevity.

Personally, I’m a huge fan of Fedora Atomic; in particular the uBlue projects, so that includes Bazzite. Therefore, I absolutely welcome you on board for Bazzite. But, it’s important to be aware that Bazzite is not representative of what (‘traditional’) Fedora is (or vice versa); it’s not a “flavor”.

I think your response has so far been the most comprehensive. Thank you so much.

It has been my pleasure :D ! Thank you for reading through all of that 😅.

“Tinkering” in my case is pretty broad. You’re correct when you suppose that I like to mess with UI aesthetics and workflows. The other misc tinkering I more mentioned in case there’s some distros that are unsuited to working with strange or niche programs (such as the media encoding and physical media management stuff I mentioned). It sounds like that’s not really much of a problem though. Anyway what counts as “niche” is very subjective so probably wasn’t that helpful to mention.

Thanks for the clarification!

I have not heard of Bazzite.

Interesting. Its fan base can be rather vocal. Furthermore, it has been enjoying a very healthy amount of media coverage. Digital Foundry dedicated a video on it. And even LTT briefly mentioned it recently.

It kinda looks to be perfect if I end up going with Fedora (It’s the most recommended so far).

I didn’t quite capture the intent of this sentence. My bad. Would you mind elaborating/clarifying/explaining? Apologies if I’m coming across as obtuse 😅.

It seems to be quite new

Correct.

and I don’t want to jump on just for it to be a flash in the pan.

I understand. I absolutely agree with you that e.g. Fedora’s future is more certain than Bazzite. Even if the latter recently reiterated their continued support.

As I understand it though, even if it is, it’s easy enough to change distros.

FWIW, the complete Fedora Atomic ecosystem -that Bazzite is part of- allows changing distros with a single command. The only limitation being that the designated distro has to be part of the ecosystem as well. So, even if Bazzite would implode one day after you’ve switched to it, you could just ‘rebase’ to (say) Fedora Kinoite.

Others have said to not be worried about locking oneself in

Agreed.

and to just jump in and try.

Kinda. It’s more nuanced I think 😅.

Also not a fan of “Gaming Mode” style UI but I guess I can just not use it.

Exactly. Bazzite on desktops/laptops defaults to the DE after logging in. So, as you’ve noted already, you don’t have to use it ;) .

Again, thank you very much for your detailed response.

You doubled down on the kind words. I appreciate it. Thank you for being you!

Why don’t you try to be useful instead? Is there anything wrong with Bazzite? Are there other distros that are better suited for what OP needs?

Honestly I’m not expecting much from ya. Though, I hope you can surprise me.

I, like many I’m sure, am taking Microsoft’s discontinuation of Windows 10 support as an opportunity so switch over to Linux.

Welcome on board!

Does the distro I pick matter?

In short: Yes.

There seems to be a lot of debate around which distro is best

TL;DR: There’s no distro that is best for everyone. Each individual has their own best. You just gotta find what suits you best.

but a lot of the discussion I’ve seen breaks down to what each distro comes packaged with

This is a thing of the past. With the excellent Distrobox, you can install any package from any distro on whatever distro you’re running.

This confuses me as if a distro doesn’t come prepackaged with something can you not just install it?

Even if we would disregard Distrobox, you should be able to install software that’s not packaged. So, you’re intuition is right.

Or is there some advantage to preinstalled packages other than mild convenience? Are some components difficult to integrate into your local environment?

Exactly. Managing software that’s not packaged in any way comes with its own set of jank. So, new users are definitely discouraged. However, as mentioned previously, this whole issue is solved with Distrobox. And if you don’t like CLI, BoxBuddy provides an excellent GUI and more. Again, this is mostly a solved problem.

One of the more salient differences I’ve seen between distros has been what the various companies and teams include aside from installed packages (such as snap and rolling out amazon search as a defult search), and the data they choose to retain/sell. Part of the reason I’m switching is due to Microsoft’s forcing in of unwanted features and advertising. Is the company that owns whatever distro I choose likely to be a problem in the future? Are there particular ones to avoid/ones to keep an eye on?

So, what you’re referring to is mostly a Ubuntu problem. They’ve made a couple of bad decisions in the past. Other than them, this is mostly non-existent.

Some peeps got question marks regarding distros like deepin, but I don’t know if there’s anything conclusive on this.

Lastly, some distros and/or (so-called) desktop environments might collect telemetry to improve themselves. But this is done in a way that suits free and open source software. Thankfully, if you’ve got problems with this, you can always turn it off.

I am the sort of person who does like to tinker with things from time to time but I do also want to use my computer most of the time so I’d like to end up using a mature distro.

So, all distros allow you to tinker. My question is: What is it you’re tinkering with?

• If you just want to have complete control on how your desktop environment behaves without going into (unofficial) extensions or editing text files, then you should at least take a look at the KDE Plasma desktop environment; which is literally found on all distros and very well supported.
• If, instead, your definition of tinkering is more broad or otherwise different than what I suggested, then please feel free to elaborate.

I have identified a few frontrunners in my search but I have seen conflicting information on which of them is “mature” (sufficiently stable so I spend less time fighting my computer than I do using it as well as having a large enough community and resources to help me remedy issues I might come across). Do any of these seem like they wouldn’t fit that bill? The frontrunners are: fedora, kubuntu, mint, pop and tuxedo.

• Fedora is a good pick. Though, I’ve been daily-driving (a) Fedora(-derivative) for almost three years now. So I might be biased :P .
• Regarding Kubuntu, let’s just say that it’s at least a controversial pick; problem being the Ubuntu part of the equation. I’d personally discourage you from going that route, but it’s ultimately your choice.
• Linux Mint is cool. I’d argue it does more hand-holding than Fedora, which is great to have as a beginner.
• Pop!_OS is interesting. It has garnered a great fanbase for a good reason: System76 sells hardware with their software (i.e. Pop!_OS), so they obviously care. However, Pop!_OS has definitely seen better days. It’s currently in limbo; the ambitious COSMIC desktop environment is just around the corner. But how smooth will the transition be? How much longer will Pop!_OS users have to endure with the relative lack of work put to the system they actually daily-drive? A lot of questions, but not a lot of answers. I’d personally discourage this as well.
• Tuxedo OS is similar to Pop!_OS. But where Pop!_OS first went to champion the GNOME desktop environment to later ‘abandon’ it for their own COSMIC. Tuxedo OS, instead, turned their eyes towards KDE Plasma. From what I’ve heard, it’s a good pick. As TUXEDO makes hardware just like System76 does, it’s unsurprising for them to care as well.

Does linux have issues interfacing with multiple monitors?

Unfortunately, I’m not very familiar with multiple monitors. The few times I did need it, which was on Fedora with GNOME, it did work well. I suppose it should be fine.

Does it handle HDR okay?

On KDE Plasma, yes. On GNOME, from what I could gather, it should work starting from GNOME 48. Which is a couple of months away. Though, IIRC, some ‘GNOME-powered’ distros may have tried to support HDR in its experimental stage already. On Cinnamon, what we find on Linux Mint’s flagship distro, AFAIK it’s not great (yet) 😅.

In terms of UI and workflow I really don’t mind putting in some time tinkering with the DE, exploring it and getting it how I like. It seems Plasma KDE might be good for this? Please let me know if this is an incorrect assessment. If it is, does it matter what DE I choose? If so, is there something you could recommend for my use case.

You hit the nail on the coffin. KDE Plasma would probably serve you best, yes. Eventually, you may want to explore Window Managers for how they could further enhance your workflow. But, let’s take it easy :P . One step at a time. Start with KDE Plasma. Get comfortable with Linux and the whole ecosystem. And if it so happens that you’re not satiated with KDE Plasma’s workflow options and you’d like to explore other possibilities, then looking into WMs is definitely a worthwhile endeavor.

I have a Nvidea build (RTX 2080). I have heard this can be an issue with Linux.

Yup. It has been better lately, but thank you for bringing this up.

I also have intermediate experience with linux through university and my job (with servers) as well as tinkering with SteamOS.

Things I use/do on my PC (roughly ordered in terms of priority):

• Gaming including emulation

Have you considered Bazzite?

Photoshop cs6

Out of everything, this could be a slight concern. You could make it work through Wine, and it seems to have decent results. If you’re not opposed to using Photoshop CC 2021, there’s this GitHub repo worth looking at as well.

davinci resolve

This is notoriously difficult to install. Thankfully, the excellent davincibox comes to the rescue. Furthermore, it’s also found in the AUR and nixpkgs. Note that the Nix package manager can be installed on (almost) any distro, though it’s relatively advanced.

Misc “Tinkering” (Handbrake, dvd burners/rippers, Really any weird thing I come across that I want to tinker with)

Assuming this “Tinkering” is the same as the one I asked you to elaborate/clarify before, then I can inform you that most distros handle it pretty well.

Alrighty, I think you’ve clearly demonstrated to have done your research. Thank you for that!

FWIW, assuming that KDE Plasma is your DE of choice (at least for now) for both its (relatively mature) HDR support and tinker-friendliness, then -out of your selected distros- only Fedora and Tuxedo OS remain to be considered.

Fam, please, as other kind people have already reminded you, make your texts look crisp. You’re talking about UI/UX and how Linux is seemingly bad at it and how you would like to put in effort so that it may improve. Then, please, at the very least, start with putting money where your mouth is and show that your communication-skills and writing are on point. You can’t work with others if communication fails.

I’ll try to digest your ramblings and provide answers wherever I can. So without further a due.

I just had a shower an was thinking why linux OSes cannot look pretty like mac? Do linux programmers have no idea what looks good?

It’s all a matter of taste, anyways. Linux offers you great standards from the get-go. And you can mold it to your heart’s content, see here for some inspiration. If you, for whatever reason, didn’t like what you saw on Linux Mint, then it’s on you to make it look better for you. If you want something that looks better by default, I’d argue that the likes GNOME, KDE Plasma, Budgie and Pantheon offer a step-up.

Because I met people in my life who are so good at programming and that other boring stuff but do not know what sells or looks good. You know what I mean? Look what you are wearing, do you really cannot afford something that suits you, you probably making 3 times what I do. Is similar thing happening with linux GUI, can afford it but dont know that it would make your community 100x bigger? And yes i noticed it is getting better over past 10 years or so. Slightly. Currently im trying linux mint with MACOS wallpaper. I do have macbook, I just wanted to try linux after i realized I cannot install freetube on mac (not the end of the world and not final decision stop using mac or windows which I also have for gaming). Not unless i run some commands to disable “security”. And i do not feel comfortable doing it. Trying freetube happened after the day when apple locked my secondary icloud account which I used to try Indian youtube premium subscription by redeeming indian itunes card to top up the balance and buy subscription via appstore. it worked for a month, good that I bought only one months youtube price worth of itunes rupees. Was about 3 euros or dollars. I am quite new even to MacOS - 5 years or so, maybe 8. 99.9% of time not using terminal.

I’ve ignored the above as it didn’t feel like you were making a point or asking a question. Please feel free to enlighten me if I’m wrong.

So again what is it with Linux GUI? Can someone collaborate with me or ideally other aspiring and avid UX/UI designers to create something that would blow everyone’s even apple users’ minds? I mean if nobody wants I can help to make linux look amazing can you just do the coding and materialize it. I mean i have no xperience and never even tried to make an os GUI concept, should I do it first and then do similar rant? using gimp or photoshop? I have both. Photoshop GUI looks better lol and I even downloaded GIMP 3.something RC…

• Step 1: Make a cool rice (read: theme/customization) using whatever Desktop Environment or Window Manager you like to use as a base.
• Step 2: Share it on one of the many unixporn platforms; we even got some of them on Lemmy.
• Step 3: If people actually like it, you can share the associated dotfiles or what have you through GitHub or elsewhere.
• Step 4: Grofit. That’s all there is to it.

P.S. do good looking linux themes exist and I just dont know it yet?

If you liked any of the ones in the link shared above, then yes.

If they do, why they are not default for distros

Why should they? They are just creations that others made for themselves. There’s no universal design language that’s universally liked/praised or whatnot. If you like what’s there by default, then use it. If not, then don’t; instead make something of your own. Linux clearly owns the scene when it comes to customized setups anyways. So just do what others like you have done: do your own ricing.

why you have to download “some code” after that.

How can they share their personal configs if you don’t download them? You could technically copy and paste all raws, but the end-result is the same; you just made it more cumbersome for yourself. Btw, I believe KDE Plasma might have a platform for sharing themes and whatnot. But please don’t quote me on this. Though, still, you’d have to download ‘stuff’.

How do I know it is not malicious?

Good question. If you can read code, then it’s quite easy. If you can’t, then ensure it’s from a reputable source. Like, if it’s from GitHub, look at:

• how many stars it has received
• how active development is

etc.

Is it that you linux users do not want big community

I think that most people would agree that having a greater piece of the pie definitely helps to be taken more seriously by all parties. So, no: Linux users would like Linux to be more mainstream.

and make linux look bad on purpose

Fam, I’ve been on Linux for almost three years now and I’m very happy with it. Once, I had to do some work on the Windows laptop of my brother. The damn thing just wouldn’t open; updating and rebooting over and over. Accepting that is nothing but Stockholm’s syndrome.

so there is no viruses and other shit that you can find for example on Windows, because I think if same amount of people who are using windows would use linux, linux would not be this secure.

Security through obscurity is definitely a thing. And while server Linux is battle-tested and pretty safe -if you know what you’re doing-, I wouldn’t say the same necessarily when it comes to desktop Linux. It’s a nuanced topic, though.

is it secure actually?

It’s as secure as you’d want it to be. See here the security section of the excellent ArchWiki. Contrary to what you might expect, most of those instructions translate pretty well to other distros. So, if you want, you can make a fortress out of your distro that would put most Windows installations to shame. But, again, it’s on you.

Can you simply explain how is it secure compared let’s say to windows?

When comparing your average distro on default settings to Windows S mode, I think I have to give it to Windows S mode; but you can’t even install software outside of the Microsoft Store, that’s part of the reason why it’s safe. But even then, the Microsoft Store isn’t a beacon of secure software to begin with… Comparing Windows S mode to Qubes OS, however, is a clear victory for Qubes OS. Though, I’d have to admit that Qubes OS is technically not a Linux distro*. Linux is only used within dom0 and the qubes; which is 99% of what how one engages with Qubes OS, though. So I understand where the confusion may stem from.

But you see, we can’t even meaningfully engage in this conversation as I don’t know what you mean exactly with Windows.

Scripts do not start running themselves? Explain me like im five please.

This can differ between distros. On RPM-based systems, we find SELinux, a piece of software that has been developed by the NSA and is to this day actively used in Android for what it brings in terms of security. Though, the distinction should be made that Android makes better use of SELinux than these RPM-based distros do. But, to give some personal insight on this; I’ve had scripts blocked that I ran on Fedora (an RPM-based distro), but most of them went through. It ultimately depends on what the script tries to do. However, scripts running by themselves is pretty wild. Though, it could happen on insecure systems.

On Linux Mint, we find AppArmor, which behaves similar to SELinux. While the latter is infamous for its complexity, it’s generally considered to be more powerful. So much so, even, that disabling SELinux was a thing peeps used to do for ‘comfort’. To give a present issue I’m dealing with myself :P ; I’m pretty sure I’m experiencing difficulty with getting Waydroid to work due to issues relating to SELinux. It’s what it is 😅. But, the piece of mind is pretty neat. Btw, Waydroid should work on most RPM-based systems, mine is just a little special :P .

But some distros don’t ship either one of the two, nor any replacement or whatsoever. So, obviously, that should raise some red flags regarding security. The distros that do this either expect the user to do it themselves, or they just don’t care for whatever reason. Losing this kind of protection isn’t necessarily fatal, but I would personally not feel comfortable.

In case you’re really bothered about security, then consider using Kicksecure or secureblue. These are the most secure general purpose Linux distros that are meant to be used as daily drivers. The aforementioned Qubes OS is still way more secure than these, but Qubes OS is technically based on Xen and not Linux. Though, note that all three of these are known as harder distros. They assume (some) knowledge and lots of reading (comprehension). Use something else first. Become comfortable with Linux. And then consider the move to these more advanced distros.

Looking at their page the prces look a bit steep for me.

I understand where this is coming from. Buying a spec-wise similar device from say Lenovo would definitely be cheaper. Unfortunately, whether it is System76, TUXEDO or NovaCustom, we pay a premium for the fact that they’re Linux-first.

I have daily driven (a) Fedora(-based distro) ever since I started using Linux. So I’m absolutely biased towards it. However, as Fedora is a semi-rolling release distro that really likes offline updates that involves a reboot, it simply falls flat when it comes to satisfying OP’s needs. They would have a very similar experience to their current one with openSUSE Tumbleweed, the very same they actively want to get rid of.

As such, this distribution would need to be able to handle running for weeks on end without a reboot.

So, it has to be something stable (i.e. receive little to no updates) that’s capable of updating without requiring a reboot. That makes any stable distro a candidate. As such, choose either:

• Debian or something based on it
• Gentoo (stable branch)
• Nixos (stable channel)
• openSUSE Leap
• Ubuntu or something based on it

As I noted in the footnotes of this comment, Qubes OS is technically not a Linux distro as it’s based on Xen instead. But yeah, it’s without a doubt the gold standard when it comes to secure by default desktop operating systems; far surpassing even Kicksecure and secureblue.

As for Tails, while its amnesiac property is excellent for protection against forensics, it’s not meant as a daily driver for general computing; which was also touched upon in the aforementioned footnotes.

For this writing, I’ll focus on the OOTB experience. Furthermore, a daily driver for general use is assumed. I’ll also try to keep it (relatively) brief and concise for the sake of brevity. The tier list found below goes from worst to best.

• Tier -1 : Actively detrimental distros. Joke/meme distros, abandoned/discontinued projects and even outright malicious products. Simply don’t use for production. The likes of Hannah Montana Linux and Red Star OS comes to mind.
• Tier 0 : Unopinionated distros. These should be regarded as blank canvases from which it’s expected that you meld and forge it to your liking. As such, at least by default, they offer nothing in this regard. However, it’s possible to build a fortress if you wish. Both Arch and Gentoo fall under this category.
• Tier 1 : Distros that have put in some work into security, but ultimately fall short. These distributions include security features and maintain regular updates, but their implementation choices can introduce security compromises. This tier often includes derivatives that modify their parent distribution’s security model, sometimes prioritizing convenience over security best practices. While it may be suitable for general use, they may not provide the same security guarantees as their upstream sources.
• Tier 2 : Distros with sane security defaults that rely on backports for their security updates. These distributions prioritize stability while maintaining security through careful backporting of security fixes. Rather than updating entire packages, they selectively patch security vulnerabilities into their stable versions. This approach provides a good balance of security and stability, though it means newer security features might take longer to arrive (if at all). Debian and Ubuntu are prime examples of this.
• Tier 3 : Distros with excellent security defaults and a (semi-)rolling release. For most normies, this is as secure as it needs to be. As it’s on a (semi-)rolling release, it receives security updates as soon as they come. Furthermore, this also allows them to benefit from new security features as soon as they appear. Curiously, the two distros that most resonate with this, i.e. Fedora and openSUSE Tumbleweed, are also known to innovate (and thus are pack leaders) when it comes to security solutions. FWIW, their respective atomic/immutable distros also belong in this tier.
• Tier 4 : Security-first distros. The crème de la crème. These are probably overkill for most people. This is also the first (and only) tier that may sacrifice usability and function for the sake of security. If your highest priority is security, then you can’t go wrong with this one. Kicksecure and secureblue are its flag bearers.

I’d personally grant Linux Mint a position in tier 2, though perhaps others would go with tier 1 instead. As such, a step-up would be a distro from either Fedora or openSUSE.

Thanks for the clarification!

If you trust both the source and the file, then downloading by itself shouldn’t constitute a problem. Supply-chain attacks are still possible, but that’s a hard problem to solve anyways. I suppose I’d only trust Qubes OS to handle that gracefully.

For general browsing, GrapheneOS-folk would advice against Firefox(-based browsers). Instead, they’d recommend (something based on) Chromium. Personally, I do follow that advice. But I understand if you’d like to stick to Firefox(-based browsers).

Coming back to Linux Mint, I won’t go over my (personal) qualms with the security model of the distros it’s based on. But as Linux Mint offers one of the best onboarding experiences, it would be a disservice to lead you elsewhere. Become comfortable with Linux through it. And, perhaps one day, if you feel like venturing elsewhere, you can try out distros that offer better security. Thankfully, Linux Mint’s OOTB security should be sufficient until then.

As for the article, everything except for the fourth recommendation is a W. Utilizing ClamAV could be cool, but it’s based on a very naive understanding. You wouldn’t want an untrusted file on your system in the first place. Obviously, a lot more mileage^[1] is possible. But one has to learn to walk before they can run 😉.

1. Note that the information and instructions found on the excellent ArchWiki often work on and/or apply to other distros as well.

GNU-Linux hardening is useless

This opinion isn’t shared by the author in their actions, as they are known for their contributions to Whonix; both as a security researcher (by their own admission) and (are to this day accredited) as a developer.

Is this a good list?

The link definitely provides some good info. It’s better than nothing. However, it may or may not fall short based on how secure you’d like to make your system.

Anything else I should do to secure a Mint install?

What is it you’re trying to protect and from whom? Whenever the topic of security comes up, one simply can’t engage meaningfully without mentioning a threat model.

In this case, I’ll assume you’re just your average Joe. And, depending on how you engage with your system, Linux Mint might be fit from the get-go. However, if you actively engage in downloading random jank from the internet and have ‘survived’ with the help of Microsoft Defender Antivirus, then you should know that a safety net as such doesn’t exist over on this side. Sure, security through obscurity might save your ass a couple of times. But it’s inevitably a losing battle.

So, without knowing your threat model, note the following important advice that the article somehow hasn’t touched upon:

• Know that you, the user, are the largest attack surface. Even if some distros like Fedora and openSUSE (with the latter AFAIK scoring the best^[1] according to Lynis) actually put in great work to offer pretty secure systems, they absolutely won’t be able to protect you against yourself.

1. It’s important to mention that this excludes security-first distros like Kicksecure and secureblue. Nor is Qubes OS considered as it’s technically not even a Linux distro. Other distros like Tails or Whonix are also not considered as they’re not meant to be used as daily drivers and/or for general use.

Unfortunately, I don’t know either. From my understanding, X11 as a whole is supported. Therefore, you should be able to hack your way through this. I suppose the installation instructions for Ubuntu should closely align to what’s required for Debian. So that’s your starting point.

what does the community think of it?

It’s important to note how the Linux community interacts with change. In the past, whenever a change has been significant enough to influence individual workflows, it often provoked strong reactions. This was evident when systemd was introduced and adopted by distros like Arch and Debian. Even though systemd was arguably superior in essential aspects for most users, it failed to meet the needs of at least a vocal minority. Consequently, community endeavors were set up to enable the use of Debian or Arch without systemd.

Similarly, the introduction of immutable distributions seems to upset some people, though (at least to me) it’s unjustified. Immutable distributions don’t necessarily alter the traditional model. For instance, the existence of Fedora Silverblue doesn’t impose changes on traditional Fedora; let alone Arch or Debian.

But, overall, most Linux users aren’t bothered by it. Though, they often don’t see a use for themselves. Personally, I attribute this at least in part to existing misconceptions and misinformation on the subject matter. Though, still, a minority^[1] (at best ~10%) actually prefers and uses ‘immutable’ distros.

Do the downsides outweigh the benefits or vice versa?

Depends entirely on what you want out of your system. For me, they absolutely do. But it’s important to note that the most important thing they impose on the user is the paradigm shift that comes with going ‘immutable’. And this is actually what traditional Linux users are most bothered by. But if you’re unfamiliar with Linux conventions, then you probably won’t even notice.

As a side note, it’s perhaps important to note that the similarities between traditional distros are greater than the similarities between immutable distros. Also, Fedora Atomic is much more like traditional Fedora than it is similar to, say, openSUSE Aeon or Vanilla OS. Grouping them together as if they are a cohesive group with very similar attributes is misleading. Of course, they share a few traits, but overall, the differences are far more pronounced.

Therefore, it is a false dichotomy to simply label them as traditional distros versus immutable distros. Beyond these names, which we have assigned to them, these labels don’t actually adequately explain how these systems work, how they interact, how their immutability is achieved (if at all), what underlying technologies they use, or how they manage user interactions. The implications of the above. Etc.

Could this help Linux reach more mainstream audiences?

The success of the Steam Deck and its SteamOS are the most striking and clear proof of this. So, yes. Absolutely.

1. Not accounting SteamOS users.

Nixos tends to lean on the term reproducible instead of immutable, because you can have settings (e.g files in /etc & ~/.config) changed outside of nix’s purview, it just won’t be reproducible and may be overwritten by nix.

Interesting. If possible, could you more explicitly draw comparisons on how this isn’t quite the same over on say Fedora Atomic? Like, sure changes of /etc are (at least by default) being kept track of. But you indeed can change it. libostree doesn’t even care what you do in your home folder. Thus, changes to e.g. ~/.config (and everything else in /var^[1]) are kept nowhere else by default.

1. Which happens to be more crowded than on other distros as folders like /opt are actually found here as well.

In your opinion, when can we refer to a distro as being immutable? How do you regard the likes of Fedora Atomic, openSUSE Aeon or Vanilla OS? Are any of these immutable in your opinion?

Ah, I get what you mean now by inflammatory statements

Actually, it wasn’t me that said that 😅. I do find it in jrgd’s reply, though.

Though interestingly, I didn’t feel my comment was very inflammatory and it got downvoted too. 😅

For the record, I also didn’t downvote your comment 😜. Though, looking at how well-received my previous reply has been, I can’t ignore the possibility that peeps that agreed with what I said also chose to downvote your comment.

I was looking at it more from just a standpoint of systemd itself

Sorry, I don’t think I completely understood you here.

just looking at it from the standpoint that fedora and rhel can tend to be industry leaders for change.

I absolutely agree with you that Fedora and Red Hat are very effective agents of change. So yes, if they would get behind an alternative for systemd, then that would definitely get traction.

if RHEL and Ubuntu together made

Has something like this ever happened in the past? I can’t recollect a collaboration of sorts between these two entities. If anything, they seem to be at odds with eachother: Mir vs Wayland, Snap vs Flatpak and even Upstart vs systemd. Though, at least so far, Red Hat holds an impressive winning track record.

I think we would see that move downstream.

Absolutely. But, and this is my inner-systemd-skeptic talking, systemd is ridiculously intertwined with the current Linux landscape and often times new updates even show a glimpse of how much more intermingling we’ll get in the future. I hope we’ll eventually get something to systemd like what PipeWire has been to PulseAudio. That’s why development into alternatives like dinit and s6 is of utmost importance.

As far as my use of the term bloated, I’m looking at it strictly from a standpoint for the amount of code that goes into the system.

Suckless it is 😜. It’s a fine definition. Thank you for that. But, I got to ask, where is the line drawn? Like, the Linux kernel, by virtue of being monolithic, has to be bloated as well. Right? So, if that’s the case, is somehow the kernel’s bloat okay while bloat is unaccepted for the system and service manager? If so, why? I’m genuinely curious.

The more code you have, the more entries for security risks.

Sure~ish. Deep discussion. I’m fine with giving this to ya.

I’m not saying that there’s anything that’s particularly better out there right now

I suppose some peeps will enjoy themselves with what’s out there. Do you happen to use an alternative on a daily-basis?

but I think we should always be looking for alternatives regardless of what your views are for the people that created the code. KISS philosophy, basically. That and being open to change to avoid stagnation.

Wholeheartedly agree 😊.

Aight, got it.

For now, I’m exclusively on Wayland. Though, hopefully Openbox (or something inspired by it) will make the jump so that I can see for myself what all this goodness is about.

Anyhow, it was a lovely conversation. I enjoyed it to bits. I wish ya tha best. Cya, out there. Bye!