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.
Your reply is much appreciated, fam! Unfortunately, I wasn't able to return right away. I thank you for your patience! Btw, I'm not native. So, if I misuse any terms/words/phrases or whatnot; my apologies. Usually, I put in some significant effort to alleviate this. Sadly, I didn't quite have the chance to do so this time. Thank you for your understanding!
Thanks fam for the compliments! Your engagement is (I think) (at least) equally commendable!
Btw, I understood the implied context of the footage. But, it would be intellectually dishonest if I didn't take into account the framing at hand. Cuz, if we were to be very critical of the footage itself (so without AP's provided text as guidance), then there's nothing explicitly there that connects those celebrations to the 9/11 killings; no burning of American flags or anything that would imply it. Granted, I assume neither of us speak Arabic. So that doesn't help either π .
Just to be clear, I'm well aware that this story is pretty much uncontested^[I did find this, but it seems to be a biased take.]. So I'm not actually disputing it. But, with the benefit of hindsight^[That is, the eventual wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.], it's hard to completely deny any ulterior motives for broadcasting said celebrations.
And to push back: is it sociologically-speaking strange for them to be glad that the biggest support of their rivals has received a retribution?
History has indeed taught us that that^[Nation states only exist since relatively recently. So, there has never been a Palestinian state or something. However, Muslim rule has dictated over those lands. My reading of history informs me that while Jews definitely weren't first-class citizens, they were fortunately not persecuted like we saw in other parts of the world.]'s a pretty likely outcome. But, I was also curious to hear your take on the other question. Namely, "What would become of the Israeli people?".
Likely indeed.
For this, I'm not so sure. But it could be.
Ah, another celebration. I'm starting to notice a pattern :P .
Another one.
This video I didn't pay a lot of attention to as the media outlet didn't seem to be as reliable as I'd like.
I think I got the message by now :P .
If sainthood is achieved through suffering alone, then I'd argue they would make a good chance. But yeah, I get where you're hinting at.