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.

  • OnfireNFS@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    I’ve been running Bazzite for months and I have extremely happy with it. I switched from Windows and only use Windows for SteamVR now. I use atomic distros almost exclusively now.

    If you like to customize and tweak everything about your OS than an atomic distro probably isn’t for you. You probably want something like Arch.

    If you need/want an OS that is incredibly reliable at the cost of disk space and customization, than an atomic distro might be for you. The main thing an atomic distro provides that a traditional one can’t is reproducibility. Since the distro is a base image with packages layered on top you should be able to repeat those steps and arrive at the exactly same image. The system partition is then made immutable so that it stays in this reproducible state. This prevents users modifying system files and creating a unique system that can’t be reproduced. This should make bugs easier to track down because each install of the distro is always identical. You can still add packages by layering them on top (think of each package you layer as another “step” in the image build process. By tracking the steps you have added it keeps the image reproducible). Its pretty similar to how a dockerfile works.

    Bazzite also keeps the previous version of the OS, so if an update fails you still have a working computer. Like others have said you can create snapshots on traditional distros so this isn’t really a unique feature, but it is nice it has it by default. I swear Bazzite also used to have A/B partitions as well which is really nice if your OS somehow gets corrupted, but my computer doesn’t seem to have them anymore.

    The other nice thing about an atomic OS is because it locks down your system partition the main way to install applications is either flatpaks or appimages. These use more disk space but should always have the correct dependencies (which fixes another whole class of errors). You can also use flatpaks or appimages on a traditional distro but an atomic one enforces it. If you can’t install an application as a flatpak or appimage you can use package layering or distrobox to install it. Distrobox allows you to have a traditional distro in a container and integrate its applications into your main atomic OS. If something goes wrong with the container you can delete it and rebuild it without affecting your OS. You can also have a different container for each app so if something happens to one container you don’t lose all of your distrobox apps. Also something you could do on a traditional distro but don’t need to.

    All of this leads to a really stable base os and the main advantage of an atomic OS: You should always be able to boot your computer. The downside is everything you install needs to be in a container so that if it causes an issue it doesn’t affect your base os booting.

    This reminds me of Proxmox and how you really shouldn’t modify the host because you risk making your system unbootable and jeopardizing your containers and vms. Its much safer to have a stable, solid base and do riskier stuff in container or vm that can fail and be rebuilt. Proxmox would actually probably be a good candidate for an atomic distribution.