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.
When I first switched to Linux, Bazzite was one of the first distros I tried, and I stuck with it for awhile. Eventually I decided to try out Arch, and I used that for a few months until I realized that all the stuff I was adding to Arch was just turning it into Bazzite. After that, I reinstalled Bazzite. If I’m going to be using all the same features, I might as well get the no maintenance out of the deal.
but if there’s one thing I’ve learned, it’s that we’re not afraid to tinker.
^ that’s the reason right there. You really can’t tinker with atomic distributions. And if you try, its just another level of abstraction that’s in your way.
You have to be trolling.
You actually CAN tinker with atomic distros even more.
Immutable distros offer penalty-free tinkering because of the aforementioned atomicity and rollbacks. If I screw something up, I can just rollback the entire OS or whichever parts I want.
How do you tinker when everything but your home directory is in read-only mode?
Good question: the reply below is corrrct. Build time.
I use atomic for systems that I want to work, full stop, no matter what.
I use traditional for systems and VMs that I want to tinker with. These may be rendered into an atomic distro at some point, if desired or necessary. But I honestly haven’t felt the need to do that yet.
It’s just about picking the appropriate baseline os type for what you want to do on the machine in question. Much like one would pick debian or fedora or rhel or suse-based distros for various technical and esoteric reasons.
This. The whole discussion about “tinkering with immutable distros” fells like it misses the point and literal meaning of atomic and immutable.
Rebuilding the whole OS to layer another immutable read-only part into it isn’t tinkering. Of changing one OS file has you rebooting, then that’s not tinker-friendly.
Atomic distributions are by definition something you don’t tinker with, and it stays the way you need it.
And no, having bundled distrobox or rollbacks doesn’t make it tinker friendly, you can do both on normal distribution.
But once you have done tinkering and want the system to stay the way it is - that’s what atomic means and is for.
This is the way. Prototype in a regular distro then lock it in with an immutable distro.
I did exactly this with my XMonad/polybar/rofi/dunst/alacritty configs which I now run on NixOS.
My limited experience with Bazzite left a sour taste in my mouth. Couldn’t install themes because the dir where themes installed for KDE was locked down.
Noe I’m sure this is fixable. But that goes back to lack of documentation. And admittedly, lack of me researching further. I stuck with my Arch install because it’s comfortable and familiar.
When asked if I read the Docs.
“…lack of documentation. And admittedly, lack of me researching further.”
Clicking on the sidebar /scrolling to the bottom of main page for Docs is hard.
Also linkage in the terminal message. 🤔
This was a long time ago, this isn’t something that was there when I had tried with KDE on an Atomic distro.
And I wasn’t asking for anyone to solve it for me. Appreciate the screenshots.
