Linux bros when they’re like “my Linux installation is *way* more stable than either Windows or Mac.”
Like bro, sit the fuck down. I haven’t reinstalled either os due to issues in years.
#linux #it
Discussion
Once you have the knowledge is difficult to break all O.S.s you'll get used to it. The hard part is choosing what you want to stick with it.
Not only that but i get pestered more often for updates and reboots from my ubuntu mate install than windows these days
This. Kernel updates are constant, as are kernel modules. All require reboots. At least Ubuntu Server has a nice service restart to reduce downtime.
ubuntu and kernels are the pits.
always best to not update kernels unless really necessary.
i run arch now, and due to it's better handling of kernels and supporting new everything i don't find myself needing to reinstall at all.
most apps are shits when it comes to migrating to a different system, sometimes even just a fresh install.
the biggest downtime comes from apps that can't keep their settings stable. i used to have huge problems with gnome 2 with this.
It was an arch kernel upgrade that brought this rant about, ironically.
If you pin your kernel version, your system is unsupported. If you upgrade, it breaks. If you have relatively recent hardware, you kinda need that upgrade in hopes the hardware support gets better…. And so the wheel spins.
yeah, with the introduction of hybrid graphics and the unstated deprecation of desktop gaming hardware this hardware issue is endlessly irritating.
it's mostly settled now, and in general the kernel on the live usb's are perfectly adequate for most gear.
really it's this idiotic new hardware that breaks old standards that is the worst part of it, and as i understand it, nvidia is the worst offender, though my experience with amd gpu's hasn't exactly been smooth.
it can't come soon enough that BSD kernels come back into fashion, most hardware makers are already writing drivers already for BSD kernels, but making them also work with the infinitely large linux kernel codebase is a total nightmare.
really, the monolithic kernel model is dead, people just haven't got around to burying it yet.
some sort of effort to deduplicate dev effort especially in hardware would be a great thing, but i'm not holding my breath.
as it is, the dispersion of effort on GUI dev is incredibly annoying. i run cinnamon now, it's the one that has the best features and doesn't keep breaking compatibility like Gnome.
that's another thing i'm sure has ruined your day more than a few times too. this gnome 4 stuff is just so unnecessary. i've not seen any actual new features in it, why did they bump the version and deliberately break half the APIs so my desktop looks like a dog's breakfast.
and who in the FUCK thought it would be a good idea to copy apple's idiotic two tone fucking windows. oof, jesus, as if theming and day/night mode wasn't already enough, let's double that.
Used to run Arch on the desktop on an old laptop back in the day, now I only have Arch on a couple VPS. I will admit Arch devs have been absolutely sloppy lately with package/system updates. I also had a kernel problem when I used Arch on Digital Ocean, but it was a custom unsupported install I did years ago before it finally kernel panicked. It's usually fine if you don't do partial system upgrades and don't use testing repo sources. FWIW Debian 12 on my X1 Thinkpad has been a very stable desktop experience. Coming from someone who has used Arch since 06, I would never recommend Arch on the desktop for development
I've been using Linux on the desktop for 20+ years. If I want it to just work, Debian is awesome. I find these days appimage, flatpak, and docker have eased a lot of the pain of running newer packages on a stable Debian core.
i've crossed in the opposite direction. i poked at debian but it wasn't any different materially from ubuntu or pop os. pop generally has been the best descendant of debian/ubuntu for gaming laptops i've found, but i got really fed up with a whole range of issues, debian, ubuntu, linux kernel, and gnome, and manjaro was just annoying with the setup.
arch has been as pleasant on my MSI bravo (which i had to sell to keep feeding myself while i work) and this old crappy lenovo ideapad 3.
several things that i have much preferred with arch is being able to set up a single efi partition with a single system partition on LUKS with only one password login, the "downgrade" program, which makes kernel management a dream, and cinnamon, i have tried several others, lxde, kde, mate, but cinnamon is just the best for a small display.
oh yeah, and i didn't mention wayland. i hate wayland, so much. wayland plus the recent version 6 kernels is such a mess, some kernels make outright garbage on the display, some don't let me change to other display modes, still others don't have working power management.
oh yeah and linux-hardened... i'm not tolerating any sniff of malware anymore after having several of my systems breached in recent months mainly by browser flaws. i had brave sync suddenly have a new unknown device appear on it. a youtube adblocker suddenly was being flagged as malware infected, and i do wonder now for how long. so i have also switched over to firefox and set it to lock everything down as well.
my system runs beautifully now, even on a 6.4 kernel, 20gb of ram with radeon APU and zram swap enabled, except for the nicer 144hz display and fast GPU i almost don't miss my bravo 15.
If you have been using Linux since floppies, and still haven't figured out how to keep Linux stable, you are doing something wrong. Also, WSL is not viable for getting work done on anything outside of user-space.
I updated my fucking computers using the built in package manager. You know, routine system maintenance.
99% of software is written in user space.
If an OS requires constant effort to keep it running, then IT IS NOT STABLE.
A reasonable action, but that doesn't mean you know what you are doing. I also recognize you stated you have been using Linux for a long time. However, duration does not always equate to experience.
First, that is factually untrue. Second, is it a user-spaceapplications breaking your system? If not, it isn't relevant to your argument. If it is, the program wasn't architected properly, and you should get rid of it.
Of course an OS requires constant effort to keep running. That is the nature of computing. Name one OS in the world which doesn't push security updates (which is still supported). You can't!
Honestly, even when things do manage to go sideways, you should have disaster recovery plans implemented. There is no reason you should have to nuke and pave every time something goes wrong.
