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.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    12 months ago

    I just can’t be bothered to switch when my current distro worked just fine for me for the last 20 years. I have no time to experiment anymore, I just want to get things done.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    93 months 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?

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    113 months ago

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

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      113 months 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.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      43 months 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.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    43 months ago

    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.

    This is my reason. I’ve been using Arch exclusively for a few years, but have used it on and off since 2008. I still don’t consider myself an expert by any means, and I frequently pull the docs and old forum threads to solve issues I run into.

    Documentation is the most important deciding factor for me. I didn’t use more fully featured distributions, even if they were “easier” becuase if I can’t look up the answer, and I have to live with something because I don’t know what button to press… I mean you may as well just give me a windows box again.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      23 months ago

      Arch benefits not just from documentation but from its repo. Whatever you get told you need, it is always a relief to find it waiting there for you already tuned for your distro.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    27
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    I switched to nixos years ago. Its better now than it ever has been as far as available packages and etc. But it does present issues if you get off the beaten path - the “now you have two problems” issue. For instance:

    • if software is not packaged for nixos already, you won’t be able to follow the ‘build from source’ directions on its github page or etc. You have to make a nix package or at least development environment first. That can be tricky and you won’t have help from the software dev.
    • If software downloads exes that require libraries to be in a certain standard location, well, they won’t work. Android studio for instance, downloads compilers and so forth. There are workarounds, mostly, but it can take a while to discover and get working and I’m sure many people give up. Again, the android studio software and documentation will be no help at all.

    That said, more and more projects are supporting nix, and nixpkgs has gotten really big. I think they support more packages than any other distro now.

  • mosiacmango
    link
    fedilink
    12
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    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.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      33 months ago

      Pop_OS! is a decent OS, been using it for a few years on my living room PC. On my gaming rig i been using Bazzite which i like where it’s going, love kde, but i can’t get surround sound working and for the life of me can’t figure out how to fix it. Might move on to another distribution, but we’ll see.

  • 柊 つかさ
    link
    fedilink
    73 months ago

    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)

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      13 months ago

      Eh since my laptop is primarily for work and running my business, I have two separate base partitions for just such an occasion that I’ll mirror across once I know nothing went stupid. I just can’t afford to be goofing around procrastinating work, and then bork my system when I need to do invoicing and the like.

  • Rodneyck
    link
    fedilink
    63 months 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.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    43 months ago

    I switched a workstation to Secureblue for the very specific security priorities targeted by that project, but I think for the majority of users, the main reason for not switching to atomic is one you mentioned: why fix what isn’t broken? The main selling point promoted to potential new users seems to be that updates don’t break anything, but I can’t remember a single time since Debian Sarge that an update broke anything for me, and I actually find the rpm-ostree package layering and updating process to be far more of a headache than otherwise.

    Unless it’s prepackaged like a steam deck, moving from the traditional way of doing things to atomic is a major change. Like any major change, people need a good reason to make it, and I think right now the only compelling ones are either hyper-specific (switching to okd and needing to build it on coreos, wanting to move to a specific atomic project, etc.), or just general curiosity.

    • typhoon
      link
      fedilink
      2
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      I’m following your path leap on Secureblue, because I found the project philosophy appealing to my interest.

      I don’t feel the same about the others Atomic distros. I’m probably missing something but other Atomic projects don’t seem to be adding much value if you know your thing for workstation home users.

      Also, to the OP, reading the comments it seems clear to me that even with the best product you won’t be able to please everyone. Although it definitely plants the interest on some that are coming across the topic for the first time, which I think is good. Learning something new should be on everyone’s list.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    43 months ago

    Most of the ones out there are weird, anti-configurable systems like mobile phone OS.

    The only ones that really seem like “the future” in my eyes are Nix and Guix.

    And I’m not going to use those because I already have a good setup with my conventional distro (Debian). Anything less than absolute perfection will not get me to switch.

    Nix is imperfect because it uses systemd. Guix is imperfect because it has a smaller selection of packages, and a more difficult configuration system.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      23 months ago

      anti-configurable systems

      Yep! This has been my experience too. Once you want to do something that the devs didn’t build, then you have to fight the OS.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    103 months ago

    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.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      13 months ago

      This is my usecase too. I don’t personally feel any need for an immutable, but for family that regularly jams up their systems, bit makes sense. Unfortunately when I tried Aurora, it just wouldn’t boot no matter what. No idea why. Mint on the other hand just worked. Hopefully Aurora will get developed more and just work also because I would love to use it for family.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      13 months ago

      Neat. I’ve been thinking of doing something similar. My parents currently use a Mac, but they mainly just use the web browser. I was thinking of switching them to VanillaOS at some point.

      mother is using Opensuse Aeon and my father in law is using Fedora Silverblue

      How long have they been using those distros? Do you or they have any preferences for Aeon or Silverblue?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        43 months ago

        As long as it works and they can do their stuff, which is minimal, they don’t care. In fact they couldn’t say what they are using if you would ask them. They would probably just say Linux. This is in my opinion the best use case for immutable distros. While setting it up Silverblue was easier, as in the setup after installation had more software installed and there is no mandatory encryption setup. Aeon feels fresh and there is absolutely no bloat, but it is still RC at the moment.

  • Shimitar
    link
    fedilink
    English
    83 months ago

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

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

  • John
    link
    fedilink
    English
    423 months ago

    oops I bricked my system

    I honestly can’t think of a single time I’ve done this in the 20 years I’ve been using linux.

    what’s keeping YOU from switching to an atomic distro

    I dunno, it just seems like the latest fad. Debian/Arch work just fine.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      43 months ago

      I’ve used Arch for 10 years as a primary desktop (well, Artix for the last 4) and barely had it bork on me. When is has, I’ve been able to boot it from grub in single user mode, mount my LUKS root drive, and downgrade whatever broke.

      SteamOS has been fine for me on the SteamDeck.

      I tried Bazzite for about a month then one day networking just broke and the documentation just wasn’t there.

    • James R Kirk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      123 months ago

      idk I’ve gotten mine into a state i couldnt fix more times than I can count. Immuteable distros have been a game changer for me and if I’m being honest I think they’re going to be the biggest thing for mainstream adoption in Linux’s entire history.

      • CarrotsHaveEars
        link
        fedilink
        23 months ago

        I think “atomic” means “a bunch of actions grouped together as one action”, so that the system won’t end up in a state where some required actions are missing and becomes unusable. But it doesn’t mean it’s unto itself making a system unbreakable: If your system starts in a state of malfunctioning, then it also takes a series of actions to fix it, be it atomic or not.

        Most Linux distributions start in the state of functioning after installation.

        • James R Kirk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          23 months ago

          Yeah you’re right, “atomic” is not the same thing as “immutable”, but they are related terms and OP appeared to be using them interchangeably so 🤷‍♀️

      • John
        link
        fedilink
        English
        83 months ago

        I’m curious what you’re doing to your system that bricks it so often that would be considered a risk for a normal every-day normie user?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          83 months ago

          Upvoting but please stop using the term “bricking” this way. Bricking is permanent and there is no recovery. You have turned your device into a useless brick.

          • John
            link
            fedilink
            English
            13 months ago

            I’m quoting the OP. His argument is that atomic distros are the future because people are out there bricking their systems.

            updates that either work 100% or roll back automatically, no more “oops I bricked my system” moments

              • John
                link
                fedilink
                English
                23 months ago

                The entire premise of this post is that people are supposedly bricking their systems, and atomic distros fix this.

                My argument is that nobody is bricking their system. I will repeat it, because that’s the assumption made by op to argue in favor of atomic distros.

                You are free to disagree, but at this point you are just arguing to argue.

        • James R Kirk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          13 months ago

          I didn’t say bricking, I was responding to the bit you wrote about immutability being “a fad”.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        9
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        It actually happened to me today on Arch.

        I updated the system, including the kernel, everything went smoothly with no errors or warnings, I rebooted, and it said the ZSTD image created by mkinitcpio was corrupt and it failed to boot.

        I booted the arch install iso, chrooted into my installation and reinstalled the linux package, rebooted, and it worked again.

        I have no explanation, this is on a perfectly working laptop with a high end SSD, no errors in memtest, not overclocked, and I’ve been using this Arch install for over a year.

        The chances of the package being corrupt when I downloaded it and the hash still being correct are astronomically low, the chances of a cosmic ray hitting the RAM at just the right time are probably just as low, the fact that mkinitcpio doesn’t verify the images that it creates is shocking, the whole thing would have been avoided on an immutable distro with A/B partitions.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      83 months ago

      I agree. I have become more amenable to things like Flatpak or Podman/Docker to keep the base system from being cluttered up with weird dependencies, but for the most part it doesn’t seem like there’s a huge upside to going full atomic if you’re already comfortable.

      • John
        link
        fedilink
        English
        33 months ago

        I love flatpak lol. something like debian + flatpak is win-win imo