KDE's New Distro: Btrfs-Based, Immutable Linux OS, with Flatpak and Snap

I am currently only on Linux on my Steam Deck and I do have two RPi's (though I don't actively use them) so I don't have personal current knowledge of differences between Snap, Flatpak, and App Image beyond that A: Snap always brings up lots and lots of hate in comments and B: is from Canonical.

But is it possible that they might choose to use Snap for having more program options due to Ubuntu being such a "mainstream" distro? I know lots and lots of programs do release Flatpaks, but are there more of them or does Snap have more? Real question since I am aware of how heated some threads get with folks being really "fuck Snap" or "it is fine." Mostly just curious since I am more and more likely to move my main PC to Linux as my main OS after Windows 10 is dead.

I don't like Snap too, but it has some advantages over Flatpak. And unfortunately the most popular distribution still uses Snap. In example it is easier to create Snap packages and Flatpak does not support CLI only applicatoins ( Edit: my bad ) , but Snap does (something like grep in example). Also some may like it more that Snap relies on AppArmor instead using the custom solution of Flatpak.

All in all, its not like black and white which is better. I still wish only one of the formats would exist, because this is not the kind of fragmentation I wish to have. But both exist and the end user should decide which of them to kill.

The place to get snaps is proprietary and exclusive.

Sounds great! I'll have a look once the user infrastructure is in place.

No but you see the drivers will be (must be) approved by Canonical which surely makes things better :|

This is highly unlikely. Snapd is open source so you can just repackage the software for your distro of choice. I don't think giving users the ability to use both Flatpak and Snap is bad. Though I would put Snap behind a disclaimer due to Snap Store's history.

Probably not the purpose of this distro but using snaps in this way are a massive benefit for embedded systems

It means a change either applied completely and successfully, or not at all (think "atomic transactions" in databases).

Atomic in software refers to an operation that cant be interrupted because it happens in one step. This one of the big selling points of atomic or immutable distros. Your system will not be left in a broken state by cancelling an update because updates do not take multiple steps, unlike traditional distros.

How could you install anything or change any setting if it was truly immutable?

Immutable OS makes sense in certain scenarios, but not in home computing.

Fedora has pushed for the change by rebranding their immutable distros as Fedora Atomic Desktops, and these are likely the most popular immutable distros. Bazzite's homepage also describes the distro as atomic, but never mentions the term immutable.

Red Hat

Atomic in software refers to an operation that cannot be interrupted, like the updates in these distros. Immutable is a more confusing term, as it leads users to believe that cannot control parts of the system, when in reality these distros still have tools to do so.

It's not semantics, they are two different things.

And to your edit... Are you upset that there are two different words that mean two different things? I don't understand.

they decided to create a bigger confusion by giving another word a completely different and exclusive meaning

Isn't this just how words work...?

Immutable does not mean "not changing", but rather that you don't have the rights to change. If you take the immutable option away, then its changing again, like when you update your system. People who have a problem with the term say, "see its not immutable, the term is a lie!". Which I kind of agree, but somewhat conflicted.

Atomic is an attempt to create a new "meaning" with a word, that cannot be misunderstood. Its trying to avoid the situation of "Free" in example. But I don't like the term Atomic either, because it just suggest to me that everything is split into many little parts and is not self explanatory like Immutable. I'm conflicted here too.

I'm always conflicted.

atomic has had a meaning for a very long time in IT, don't pretend that it's something made up bullshit. with this thinking we could just throw out the word mutable/immutable too, what is it my computer is radioactive and I'll get cancer from it? of course not, because it has a different meaning with computers, and people in the know (not even just professionals because I'm not one) know it.

atomic means that if multiple things would change, they will either change at once, or if the task failed none of it will change.
sometimes these are called transactions, suse calls it transactional updates. but is that any better? now the complaint will be that suse must have transacted away all the money from your bank account!

and distros are obviously not immutable, that's just plainly misleading. we update them, someone does that daily. updating requires it to be mutable, to be modifiable.

How could you install anything or change any setting if it "doesn't change" ?

I wonder what the differences will be!

I use normal KDE because I don't know how much of a hassle it would be to put everything in containers and use flatpaks for everything.

Looks like there's still something you can try, brother.

My switch to Linux started 1,5 years ago with Manjaro KDE - and since then, I am still a fan of KDE, which is kind of "Windows UI done right" for me. Ergonomic, configurable, consistent. I also find Pantheon, Enlightenment, and Budgie to be cool concepts, but from a practical side, KDE is a no-brainer for me.

Mint comes with Cinnamon by default, and I guess that's what you're using. For me, Cinnamon is too old-fashioned, it's like you're back to at least Windows 7 timing. Some people like it, but for me it's just old and out of touch with the progress of UI's.

GNOME used in Ubuntu is good with app theming (yay for adwaita!), it is unique and minimalistic, but its overall design is just...not for everyone, and customization is heavily tied to unsafe practice of plugins which has been exploited many, many times.

With all that said, try everything out in a VM or something and see what's good for you. There are really no wrong choices!

Neon isn't arch based, which is why this one piqued my interest.

That is being maintained by the kde team.

You certainly have to learn new ways of doing things when you want to tinker, but they are basically UNBREAKABLE, which is my main plus point. I'm busy, I need my PC to be reliable. I don't want to have to troubleshoot stuff just to keep it up and running.

If I had more time I would really enjoy the tinkering, but I don't so I need my distro just work.

I personally don’t tinker much with the OS. I want it to stay out of the way and let me do things. In the case of Bazzite, everything I need for gaming is just there and works without me lifting a finger.

I like the safety and simplicity immutables bring.

If I’m doing something out of the ordinary, a temporary container usually suffices.

It’s really made the switch from Windows as a daily driver much easier.

Some people like it, I don't like and will never mess with it. I do understand why some folks like it. It's basically for those who want a system that'll never break to a point where they can't access their data. I just can't use it

Immutable is fantastic in theory. Where it falls apart is having to basically rebuild the whole distro every time you want to make a change. It should be there your base distro is immutable, then any extra changes go on an additional mutable layer but that would be difficult to set up. (You'd need a package manager like Nixos or something.)