this post was submitted on 21 Apr 2025
112 points (95.9% liked)

Linux

53439 readers
632 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Look, I've only been a Linux user for a couple of years, but if there's one thing I've learned, it's that we're not afraid to tinker. Most of us came from Windows or macOS at some point, ditching the mainstream for better control, privacy, or just to escape the corporate BS. We're the people who choose the harder path when we think it's worth it.

Which is why I find it so damn interesting that atomic distros haven't caught on more. The landscape is incredibly diverse now - from gaming-focused Bazzite to the purely functional philosophy of Guix System. These distros couldn't be more different in their approaches, but they all share this core atomic DNA.

These systems offer some seriously compelling stuff - updates that either work 100% or roll back automatically, no more "oops I bricked my system" moments, better security through immutability, and way fewer update headaches.

So what gives? Why aren't more of us jumping on board? From my conversations and personal experience, I think it boils down to a few things:

Our current setups already work fine. Let's be honest - when you've spent years perfecting your Arch or Debian setup, the thought of learning a whole new paradigm feels exhausting. Why fix what isn't broken, right?

The learning curve seems steep. Yes, you can do pretty much everything on atomic distros that you can on traditional ones, but the how is different. Instead of apt install whatever and editing config files directly, you're suddenly dealing with containers, layering, or declarative configs. It's not necessarily harder, just... different.

The docs can be sparse. Traditional distros have decades of guides, forum posts, and StackExchange answers. Atomic systems? Not nearly as much. When something breaks at 2am, knowing there's a million Google results for your error message is comforting.

I've been thinking about this because Linux has overcome similar hurdles before. Remember when gaming on Linux was basically impossible? Now we have the Steam Deck running an immutable SteamOS (of all things!) and my non-Linux friends are buying them without even realizing they're using Linux. It just works.

So I'm genuinely curious - what's keeping YOU from switching to an atomic distro? Is it specific software you need? Concerns about customization? Just can't be bothered to learn new tricks?

Your answers might actually help developers focus on the right pain points. The atomic approach makes so much sense on paper that I'm convinced it's the future - we just need to figure out what's stopping people from making the jump today.

So what would it actually take to get you to switch? I'm all ears.

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 3aqn5k6ryk@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The reason most people still stick with windows/Macs. Current OS just works. I personally run mint, it works.

Before this i run windows 10 LTSC. The only reason i jump to mint is because it is almost the same as windows.

[–] null_dot@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 day ago

Pretty much me.

I've been daily driving debian for many years. I'm very comfortable here.

In 2025 with docker containers and flatpaks the benefits of an atomic OS don't feel very compelling.

[–] DarkMetatron@feddit.org 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Atomic/immutable distros are just another tool in the tool box. It is great for systems with a limited use scenario like the SteamDeck or HTPCs. I also love to install immutable distributions on systems where the user (often IT-illiterate) and the administrator are different people.

On my desktop PC I will, for the foreseeable future, use a normal distro (ArchLinux in my case) but i am planing to look into changing my servers to immutable with docker. That could make updates/maintenance easier and reduce the risk for full server compromises

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] despaircode@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 day ago

Look, I'm a Slacker. It's not the Slack way.

[–] gi1242@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago

i use arch. I've got it set up and it works really well for me. I'd only switch if I had some feature I needed in atomic that I can't have in arch. (not just a feature atomic has, but a feature I need that atomic has)

[–] paequ2 12 points 2 days ago (1 children)

what’s keeping YOU from switching to an atomic distro?

I tried switching to VanillaOS a month ago. I had a hell of a time getting my niche use-case to work, consisting of using Syncthing to sync my Obsidian notes to a server via Tailscale. Apparently, I had to create a custom VanillaOS image just to install Tailscale? Also, I couldn't get wl-copy to work. Also, docs were out of date and missing.

See notes: https://lemmy.today/post/25622342/14849341

I like Arch because I have control over the system. At least with VanillaOS (not sure about other immutable distros), it seems like I'm supposed to give up control or fight with the system to let me do what I want.

I actually have accidentally bricked my Linux system in the past, but that was a long time ago and I learned from the experience. So it's not a problem I currently have.

I still haven't gotten to doing this, but actually, I was thinking the locked down nature of VanillaOS might be fine for my parents. They currently only use their Mac for browsing the web and not much else. Seems like VanillaOS might be a good fit for users that don't have very demanding computing needs.

[–] med@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 day ago

Sounds like I won't be using Vanilla because that (obsidian + synching + tailscale) is definitely my primary need.

The last time I played with it, I just remember thinking, cool - but why?

[–] jjlinux@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 day ago

In my case, I tinker quite a bit when I'm bored, and immutable distros, as well as atomic distros, raise barriers that I'd rather not have to jump over to have my fill of tinkering.

[–] Artopal@lemmy.ml 9 points 2 days ago

You just said it yourself. I do like to tinker. I can install a distro in 15 minutes. I can fix my system. I do make backups. Why would I need or want an atomic distro again?

[–] mosiacmango@lemm.ee 13 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Ive been using pop-os for my desktop for years. Ive had no update headaches, roll back issues, or anything else that would compel me to swap distros for one that made these things better.

So to answer your question:

None of the above are compelling features that justify the work to switch off an already very stable distro.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Shimitar@downonthestreet.eu 10 points 2 days ago

Doesn't solve any problem I have. Why switch?

Also, interesting concept the immutable one, but just... Why?

[–] nezach@discuss.tchncs.de 10 points 2 days ago (3 children)

I have a small testing field. My mother is using Opensuse Aeon and my father in law is using Fedora Silverblue. Since I am their IT support it's fine. I asked what they wanna do on their Laptops and figured it doesn't matter if they use windows, mac or any linux distro. Since I am most comfortable with linux, it is what they are using now. They are happy and I am getting the same amount of questions as before. Had no real trouble since then.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] VinesNFluff@pawb.social 1 points 1 day ago

I'd have to relearn a bunch of shit.

Don't feel up to it. I'm so used to my setup.

Even using SteamOS ("Arch but we modded it to be sorta kinda like an immutable distro but not really") miffs me more than it should.

[–] golden_zealot@lemmy.ml 7 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I really like Debian stable, and have for a very long time. I'm not too fearful of fucking up the system because Debian stable is more stable than most anvils, and I have timeshift installed with regular backups configured which get stored locally and to a RAID 5 array on my NAS system (which is also running Debian). Anything super duper important I also put onto a cloud host I have in Switzerland.

If I want to do something insane to the system, which is rare, then I test it extensively in virtualization first until I am comfortable enough to do it on my actual system, take backups, and then do it.

I am working to make my backup/disaster recovery solution even better, but as it stands I could blow my PC up with a stick of dynamite and have a working system running a day later with access to all of my stuff as it was this morning so long as a store that sells system hardware is open locally. If it were a disk failure, or something in software, It would take less than a day to recover.

So what keeps me from switching is that I really do not see a need to, and I like my OS.

[–] digdilem@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 day ago

Same. Been using debian stable for over two decades. It does everything I need,

At work we use EL distros in vms. All of them are backed up by image every 3 hours, so a non-booting system is generally best dealt with by simply restoring the whole vm from before the change.

I'm not opposed to atomics, but I don't have the need and haven't yet invested much time into learning their differences.

[–] limelight79@lemm.ee 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Similar for me. Debian works.

And I'm just too busy with other things to bother trying different distros. I want my computer to work with a minimum of fuss.

That said Bazzite does sound interesting and might go on my gaming system. Debian stable isn't the best choice for that. Lol

[–] golden_zealot@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yea I like to play around with some different distros in virtualization occasionally to see what's up, but I have found Debian just always meets my needs 98% of the way in addition to basically never breaking.

I know Bazzite is built specifically for gaming, but I can play pretty much everything I want on Debian using my Nvidia card and Proton. The Nvidia drivers were a lot easier to install than I think a lot of people make them out to be, but I might just be lucky with my hardware or something. Armored Core VI runs great for example, and I'm even using Gnome, not KDE.

In my experience I'm kind of hard pressed to see the benefit of Bazzite over Debian when it comes to gaming actually, but I don't know a tonne about Bazzite so I'll digress.

[–] limelight79@lemm.ee 4 points 1 day ago

I struggled getting Zwift (online cycling game) running on Debian, and the issue turned out to be that WINE on Debian is a major version behind.

I did get it working, and everything else works (retro game emulators), but it's like, huh maybe that wasn't the best choice.

[–] communism@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

My main reason is one you listed. My setup works well for me; I enjoy it; and I don't feel the need to fix what ain't broke (when the "fix" likely involves breaking a lot of things I need to fix, and generally a lot of time and effort). Plus, from what I can tell, if you are particular about parts of your system, the immutable distros on offer are not diverse enough to cater to you—eg can I use my preferred init system, runit? All the immutable distros I know are systemd (which I am not a big hater of, but I like and am accustomed to runit already).

Edit: saw what you said at the end about what it would take for me to switch. It would be if I had a real use case for it, eg I regularly had problems that an immutable distro would solve, or I could see a way that an immutable distro would drastically improve my workflow.

[–] whatsgoingdom@rollenspiel.forum 10 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Probably because everyone is still constantly recommending Mint as a good distro for beginners.

[–] LeFantome@programming.dev 13 points 2 days ago

People recommend Mint mostly as a better Ubuntu I think. Ubuntu is still the most popular and, increasingly, not the best distro to start with.

Fedora currently fills the space that Ubuntu used to fill. Probably the biggest caveat with Fedora now is the lack of codecs by default.

[–] Liberal_Ghost@lemmy.zip 5 points 2 days ago

I JUST switched to Linux, and I tried Mint and Fedora, ending IP sticking with fedora. You are correct so many people said to use mint as a begginer.

[–] Horse@lemmygrad.ml 3 points 1 day ago

updates that either work 100% or roll back automatically, no more “oops I bricked my system” moments, better security through immutability, and way fewer update headaches.

i have used arch derivatives for 3 years and only fucked my system once, it took less than half an hour to fix so this isn't particularly compelling for me

chasing the new hotness is not something i do with my daily driver, might check it out on a laptop if i'm bored

[–] eXi@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Nvidia RTX graphic card, Valorant, Microsoft Office suite, Adobe Creative Cloud, QuickBooks, AutoCAD, Revit, Visual Studio (full version), DirectX 12-dependent games like Microsoft Flight Simulator, Microsoft Teams, Visio, Power BI Desktop, Windows Mixed Reality, Dragon NaturallySpeaking, Adobe Premiere Pro, Adobe After Effects, CorelDRAW, Ubisoft Connect games, Cricut Design Space, MAGIX Vegas Pro, Acronis True Image, some more industry software.. just to name a few.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] CsXGF8uzUAOh6fqV@lemmy.world 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I like fucking around and finding out. I also don't like roll backs, real men only roll forwards :)

(don't take that too seriously please)

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] racketlauncher831@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Back in the day when embedded devices are running Linux kernel 2.6, the kernel is gzipped and saved to an SPI flash, then extracted to RAM and run from there.

Does that sound immutable enough to you?

The decision on this design wasn't for an immutable system, but just that flash chips were expensive. Immutability was an accidental achievement.

Actually we developers dreamed every day we can directly modify the operating system ad hoc, not needing to go through the compile-flash-boot agonising process just to debug a config file.

You see, my point is, when a system is in good hands, it just does not break. End of story.

Maybe the next time before you guys press Enter after pacman -Syyu (not exclusively saying your distro is bad, Arch pals, sorry), think about the risk and recovery plan. If you are just an end user expecting 100% uptime and rarely contributing (reporting bugs at least), consider switch to a more stable distro (I heard Debian is good), and ask yourself if you want an immutable distro, or do you just want a super stable system.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Rodneyck@lemm.ee 5 points 2 days ago

Long, LONG, time linux user here, but to answer your question, most general users don't tinker. They want it to 'just work,' which is why Apple, and to a lesser extent Windows, has dumbed everything down and made it proprietary (beyond just the locked in money thing) so users don't have to think. Plus, support is a big money maker, for the corporations anyway.

[–] Stizzah@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 1 day ago

what’s keeping YOU from switching to an atomic distro?

I'm not interested, Fedora is ok.

we just need to figure out what’s stopping people from making the jump

Not everybody is interested. And certainly not everybody thinks that immutable distros are the end of history. Just you.

[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

ive been meaning to even try another distro for a while, regardless of being immutable or not.

but my machine works just fine how it is. why change it?

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›