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.
The reason most people still stick with windows/Macs. Current OS just works. I personally run mint, it works.
Before this i run windows 10 LTSC. The only reason i jump to mint is because it is almost the same as windows.
Pretty much me.
I’ve been daily driving debian for many years. I’m very comfortable here.
In 2025 with docker containers and flatpaks the benefits of an atomic OS don’t feel very compelling.
I tried Silverblue.
And I wanted to run it without layering, cause everyone tells you to avoid it, since it kinda defeats the purpose of an atomic distro in the first place.First of all, it was buggy. As an example, automatic updates didn’t work, I had to reboot twice for it to actually apply.
None of the docs helped (actually, there wasn’t any in-depth documentation at all). And no one had a solution besides “It should actually just work”.
That’s the main advantage (the devs test with the exact same system you run) gone right from the start.Then Firefox is part of the base image, but it’s Fedora’s version, which doesn’t come with all codecs.
If you install Firefox from Flathub, you now have 2 Firefox’s installed, with identical icons in the GUI. So you need to hide one by deleting its desktop file. Except you can’t. So you have to copy it into your home directory and edit it to hide the icon.
Then I went through all the installed programs to replace the Fedora version with the Flathub version, cause what’s the point of Flatpak if I’m using derivative versions? I want what the app’s dev made.Then it was missing command line tools I’m used to. Installing them in a container didn’t work well cause they need access to the entire system.
Finally, I realized even Gnome Tweaks wasn’t part of the installation, and it isn’t available as Flatpak.
That’s the point where I tipped my hat and went back to Debian. Which isn’t atomic, but never gave me any issues in the first place.Maybe it’s better now, I was on the previous version. Or maybe the Ublue flavours are better. But I don’t see any reason to start distro-hopping again after that first experience.
Honestly what you are describing here would bother me too. For example on my notebook I rely on configuring grub to use kernel argument
amdgpu.abmlevel=0which fixes the screen colors getting washed out when in battery saving mode, but I doubt I would be able to configure grub on an atomic distro.
Debian just works, it doesn’t complain if I forget to update it for a couple years, and I don’t feel like reinstalling my os this year
Doesn’t solve any problem I have. Why switch?
Also, interesting concept the immutable one, but just… Why?
My current setup works perfectly fine, haven’t bricked my system in half a decade.
The learning curve seems steep. It seems to introduce a lot of complexity without much benefit for me. Docs are sparse and everything that is already out there is written with “traditional” setups in mind.The learning curve is non-existent for its use case.
You boot it up, open the software center, choose the apps you like and run them.
It’s like Android for the PC.If you notice a learning curve, run into barriers, or try to wrap your head around containers and layering, you’re already not the target demographic, and better off using a traditional distro.
Nah, I heavily disagree. It’s amazing for developers too, and they are explicitly part of the target demographic - not just of the normal variants, there’s even special developer-targeted images like Aurora.
what’s keeping YOU from switching to an atomic distro?
I tried switching to VanillaOS a month ago. I had a hell of a time getting my niche use-case to work, consisting of using Syncthing to sync my Obsidian notes to a server via Tailscale. Apparently, I had to create a custom VanillaOS image just to install Tailscale? Also, I couldn’t get
wl-copyto work. Also, docs were out of date and missing.See notes: https://lemmy.today/post/25622342/14849341
I like Arch because I have control over the system. At least with VanillaOS (not sure about other immutable distros), it seems like I’m supposed to give up control or fight with the system to let me do what I want.
I actually have accidentally bricked my Linux system in the past, but that was a long time ago and I learned from the experience. So it’s not a problem I currently have.
I still haven’t gotten to doing this, but actually, I was thinking the locked down nature of VanillaOS might be fine for my parents. They currently only use their Mac for browsing the web and not much else. Seems like VanillaOS might be a good fit for users that don’t have very demanding computing needs.
Sounds like I won’t be using Vanilla because that (obsidian + synching + tailscale) is definitely my primary need.
The last time I played with it, I just remember thinking, cool - but why?
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.
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.
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.
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.
I wonder if OP and about 3/4 of the people in here understand the difference between atomic and immutable.
FWIW, I actually do understand the difference 😅.
As the term “immutable distro” has -unfortunately- become a misnomer, I went with the (more) descriptive “atomic distro” instead. At least it rings better than names like “distro with transactional updates”, “distro with (some degree of) managed state” or -heck- “distro with anti-hysteresis properties” 😜.
Granted, perhaps the notion (and/or intention) to lump the likes of NixOS together with Endless OS under one oversimplified umbrella term isn’t being helpful either. But I digress…
Though, I find solace in the fact that (at least within these discussions) Gentoo is regarded as a traditional distro 🤣.
Or…, put more formally: Creating and maintaining precise terminology for the diverse Linux ecosystem is incredibly challenging. While nerds like myself would enjoy the classification work, the effort required to keep terms accurate and widely understood in this ever-evolving landscape is no joke 😭.
Anyhow, I might as well hijack the remainder of this comment to thank you and everyone else that made contributions to this discussion. Much appreciated!
I’m not sure I do, please can you explain?
Atomic distros update in a monolithic block and if it fails, it’s as if no part of it occurred.
Immutable distros have a readonly filesystem and you can’t change any part of the system without explicitly remounting the files to write, then doing your updates. It’s not necessarily atomic when that update occurs, either.
You don’t need to layer or containerize applications you install in an atomic system, you can install an application as normal with the system package manager, it just has to complete successfully to be installed, then it becomes part of the overall A/B update system.
Immutable distros need to containerize the installations, or use layering to apply applications to the underlying RO filesystem, which makes installing software rather a pain in the ass at times.
OP keeps using the word “atomic” but the questions and explanation are more about “immutable”. And my answer to them about why wouldn’t I use an immutable system is pretty much the last, installing/updating/troubleshooting non-system software is a pain in the ass. On a dev station, it’s a nightmare.
You are technically correct about “atomic” and “immutable”, but you’re missing that e.g. the Fedora images use the wording “atomic” to refer to their update procedure, and they implement this using an immutable system. Nobody here is misusing these terms, because they are both applicable in this context.
On a dev station, it’s a nightmare.
I’ve been very happy with it on my dev stations, definitely hasn’t been a nightmare!
Managing 30+ machines with NixOS in a single unified config, currently sitting at a total of around 17k lines of nix code.
In other words, I have put a lot of time into this. It was a very steep learning curve, but it’s paid for itself multiple times over by now.
For “newcomers”, my observations can be boiled down to this: if you only manage one machine, it’s not worth it. Maaaaaybe give home-manager a try and see if you like it.
Situation is probably different with things like Silverblue (IMO throwing those kinds of distros in with Guix and NixOS is a bit misleading - very different philosophy and user experience), but I can only talk about Nix here.
With Nix, the real benefit comes once you handle multiple machines. Identical or similar configurations get combined or parametrized. Config values set for Host A can be reused and decisions be made automatically based on it in Host B, for example:
- all hosts know my SSH pub keys from first boot, without ever having to configure anything in any of them
- my NAS IP is set once, all hosts requiring NAS access just reuse it implicitly
- creating new proxmox VMs just means adding, on average, 10 lines of nix config (saying: your ID will be this, you will run that service) and a single command, because the heavy lifting and configuring has already been done, once -…
I think most users just don’t really know much about atomic distros. A lot of people in this thread don’t seem to really understand the benefits and mention downsides that don’t really exist in most of them. I think eventually (and by that I mean in a VERY long time) atomic distros will become the standard. AerynOS is an upcoming one that seems to have a really amazing blend of it’s atomic features without disrupting the user experience people expect from more typical distros. It won’t replace Nix for me, but I hope it’ll convince a lot of people to try it out.
I also think atomic distros will become the norm eventually, but I think there’s a long way to go, and not just with user adoption. When I was looking into Nix I was very excited for quite a while, but eventually I realised it’s just another way of handling the package distribution/integration problem. A brilliant one, I agree, but with upsides and downsides like any other answer. And I realised that the incredible work put in by the Debian packagers is a better fit for my needs, no matter that it’s an older approach.
Perhaps one day, Nix or Nix-like will mature and grow to have the right options to fill my needs better. Perhaps one of the modern Atomics will be good enough for me. Or perhaps Debian et al will run out of steam and good works, or perhaps my needs will change. Or perhaps I’ll die first, after a long and happy life using traditional community package distributions.
But I look forward to the glorious future of GUIX/HURD. Even if I never live to see it.
There’s Guix sytem running on top of linux, so you don’t need to wait for hurd, :)
I use atomic distros on my server and a media centre, but don’t see any reason to do it on my main systems. Stability is fine, and atomic distros make said tinkering more difficult.
I’m currently testing fedora (upgrading from mint) and since I’m fairly new I don’t want to venture into the fairly unknown territory that is Immutable atm.
Plus, I using a VPN, its crucial for my work, and I already see there are some issues with it because it has to be layered and blá bla bla.
Basically I’m just giving Atomic distros one or 2 years more so that the technology matures, software developers start taking it seriously enough to work around them, and for guides to start coming out.
ive been meaning to even try another distro for a while, regardless of being immutable or not.
but my machine works just fine how it is. why change it now?
Customizations, especially theming, at the system level. Or just learning to modify system files on an atomic distro, in general.
I’m sure it’s doable and I am genuinely interested in moving to atomic/immutable distros. But more for the security aspect than reliability as I’ve yet to break my install of Linux in a way that takes more than an hour to recover from. I’ve enjoyed the predictability of Debian and my very particular taste in UI makes for additional baggage just reinstalling, let alone moving to a very different distro.
