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.
Lack of interest. It doesn’t solve any problems that I have.
But just think about all the problems you’re not having that you could be solving!
Exactly. It solves problems which I don’t have.
Near as I can tell they’re primarily aimed at desktop users who want to treat their computer like a smartphone.
I do software development and need a ton of tools installed that aren’t just “flatpaks”. IntelliJ, Pycharm, sdkman, pyenv, Oracle libraries and binaries, databases, etc. The last time I tried this I ran into a bunch of issues. And for what gain? Basically zero.
I don’t think that’s a very accurate assessment at all. NixOS, VanillaOS, and Bluefin are three of the first atomic distro’s I think of and they’re all heavily aimed at developers. All of them offer features to help separate development environments, which improve reproducibility of packages and environments. I prefer the Nix approach to containers, but each one definitely offers benefits for software development.
I do software development and need a ton of tools installed that aren’t just “flatpaks”.
Every atomic distro supports distrobox and other containerization tools, and many support Nix and brew.
These distros are good for people who want to treat their desktop like a phone, but flatpak kinda lets you do that on any distro. Atomic distros are great for those who want to use tools to separate development environments for purity and tinker with the ability to easily rollback.
I don’t think that’s a very accurate assessment at all.
It’s the sense I got. It made everything harder for me.
Every atomic distro supports distrobox and other containerization tools, and many support Nix and brew.
I like the idea of distrobox but it’s simply broken. Things just don’t “work”. I’ve hit weird problems each time I try to use it for anything meaningful (don’t ask what - I don’t remember and I was always jumping down rabbit holes to figure out how to just get things that should work working). And the shared home directory model is simply broken by design since you now get competing containers fighting over the same files. You can use per-container home directories and now you get to setup a linux environment from scratch for each distrobox. So much duplication of effort… What a terrible implementation of what is potentially useful idea.
I thought it would be kinda like using Docker but it’s so much worse. Docker works well because the containers are often pretty simple with few requirements. Desktop environments are messy.
And frankly it’s not really worth it in the end. pyenv, sdkman and others have basically solved that problem without adding weird things to debug. They genuinely “just work” and let you easily switch versions of java, python, groovy, etc.
Probably because everyone is still constantly recommending Mint as a good distro for beginners.
People recommend Mint mostly as a better Ubuntu I think. Ubuntu is still the most popular and, increasingly, not the best distro to start with.
Fedora currently fills the space that Ubuntu used to fill. Probably the biggest caveat with Fedora now is the lack of codecs by default.
I JUST switched to Linux, and I tried Mint and Fedora, ending IP sticking with fedora. You are correct so many people said to use mint as a begginer.
I switched to nixos years ago. Its better now than it ever has been as far as available packages and etc. But it does present issues if you get off the beaten path - the “now you have two problems” issue. For instance:
- if software is not packaged for nixos already, you won’t be able to follow the ‘build from source’ directions on its github page or etc. You have to make a nix package or at least development environment first. That can be tricky and you won’t have help from the software dev.
- If software downloads exes that require libraries to be in a certain standard location, well, they won’t work. Android studio for instance, downloads compilers and so forth. There are workarounds, mostly, but it can take a while to discover and get working and I’m sure many people give up. Again, the android studio software and documentation will be no help at all.
That said, more and more projects are supporting nix now, and nixpkgs has gotten really big. I think they support more packages than any other distro now.
I like fucking around and finding out. I also don’t like roll backs, real men only roll forwards :)
(don’t take that too seriously please)
My current distro uses APK as a package manager and that is already atomic. So I guess my current setup works fine.
Ive been using pop-os for my desktop for years. Ive had no update headaches, roll back issues, or anything else that would compel me to swap distros for one that made these things better.
So to answer your question:
None of the above are compelling features that justify the work to switch off an already very stable distro.
Pop_OS! is a decent OS, been using it for a few years on my living room PC. On my gaming rig i been using Bazzite which i like where it’s going, love kde, but i can’t get surround sound working and for the life of me can’t figure out how to fix it. Might move on to another distribution, but we’ll see.
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 have a small testing field. My mother is using Opensuse Aeon and my father in law is using Fedora Silverblue. Since I am their IT support it’s fine. I asked what they wanna do on their Laptops and figured it doesn’t matter if they use windows, mac or any linux distro. Since I am most comfortable with linux, it is what they are using now. They are happy and I am getting the same amount of questions as before. Had no real trouble since then.
Neat. I’ve been thinking of doing something similar. My parents currently use a Mac, but they mainly just use the web browser. I was thinking of switching them to VanillaOS at some point.
mother is using Opensuse Aeon and my father in law is using Fedora Silverblue
How long have they been using those distros? Do you or they have any preferences for Aeon or Silverblue?
As long as it works and they can do their stuff, which is minimal, they don’t care. In fact they couldn’t say what they are using if you would ask them. They would probably just say Linux. This is in my opinion the best use case for immutable distros. While setting it up Silverblue was easier, as in the setup after installation had more software installed and there is no mandatory encryption setup. Aeon feels fresh and there is absolutely no bloat, but it is still RC at the moment.
Long, LONG, time linux user here, but to answer your question, most general users don’t tinker. They want it to ‘just work,’ which is why Apple, and to a lesser extent Windows, has dumbed everything down and made it proprietary (beyond just the locked in money thing) so users don’t have to think. Plus, support is a big money maker, for the corporations anyway.
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.
I switched a workstation to Secureblue for the very specific security priorities targeted by that project, but I think for the majority of users, the main reason for not switching to atomic is one you mentioned: why fix what isn’t broken? The main selling point promoted to potential new users seems to be that updates don’t break anything, but I can’t remember a single time since Debian Sarge that an update broke anything for me, and I actually find the rpm-ostree package layering and updating process to be far more of a headache than otherwise.
Unless it’s prepackaged like a steam deck, moving from the traditional way of doing things to atomic is a major change. Like any major change, people need a good reason to make it, and I think right now the only compelling ones are either hyper-specific (switching to okd and needing to build it on coreos, wanting to move to a specific atomic project, etc.), or just general curiosity.
I’m following your path jumping on Secureblue, because I found the project philosophy appealing to my interest.
I don’t feel the same about the others Atomic distros. I’m probably missing something but other Atomic projects don’t seem to be adding much value if you know your thing for workstation home users.
Also, to the OP, reading the comments it seems clear to me that even with the best product you won’t be able to please everyone. Although it definitely plants the interest on some that are coming across the topic for the first time, which I think is good. Learning something new should be on everyone’s list.
oops I bricked my system
I honestly can’t think of a single time I’ve done this in the 20 years I’ve been using linux.
what’s keeping YOU from switching to an atomic distro
I dunno, it just seems like the latest fad. Debian/Arch work just fine.
I’ve used Arch for 10 years as a primary desktop (well, Artix for the last 4) and barely had it bork on me. When is has, I’ve been able to boot it from grub in single user mode, mount my LUKS root drive, and downgrade whatever broke.
SteamOS has been fine for me on the SteamDeck.
I tried Bazzite for about a month then one day networking just broke and the documentation just wasn’t there.
idk I’ve gotten mine into a state i couldnt fix more times than I can count. Immuteable distros have been a game changer for me and if I’m being honest I think they’re going to be the biggest thing for mainstream adoption in Linux’s entire history.
I’m curious what you’re doing to your system that bricks it so often that would be considered a risk for a normal every-day normie user?
Upvoting but please stop using the term “bricking” this way. Bricking is permanent and there is no recovery. You have turned your device into a useless brick.
I’m quoting the OP. His argument is that atomic distros are the future because people are out there bricking their systems.
updates that either work 100% or roll back automatically, no more “oops I bricked my system” moments
Doesn’t mean you have to repeat it 🙂
The entire premise of this post is that people are supposedly bricking their systems, and atomic distros fix this.
My argument is that nobody is bricking their system. I will repeat it, because that’s the assumption made by op to argue in favor of atomic distros.
You are free to disagree, but at this point you are just arguing to argue.
deleted by creator
I think “atomic” means “a bunch of actions grouped together as one action”, so that the system won’t end up in a state where some required actions are missing and becomes unusable. But it doesn’t mean it’s unto itself making a system unbreakable: If your system starts in a state of malfunctioning, then it also takes a series of actions to fix it, be it atomic or not.
Most Linux distributions start in the state of functioning after installation.
Yeah you’re right, “atomic” is not the same thing as “immutable”, but they are related terms and OP appeared to be using them interchangeably so 🤷♀️
I agree. I have become more amenable to things like Flatpak or Podman/Docker to keep the base system from being cluttered up with weird dependencies, but for the most part it doesn’t seem like there’s a huge upside to going full atomic if you’re already comfortable.
I love flatpak lol. something like debian + flatpak is win-win imo
I bricked it because the Ubuntu LTS 22 to 24 upgrade failed and I forgot and rebooted anyway
The whole “I bricked my system” thing is just ridiculous.
It actually happened to me today on Arch.
I updated the system, including the kernel, everything went smoothly with no errors or warnings, I rebooted, and it said the ZSTD image created by mkinitcpio was corrupt and it failed to boot.
I booted the arch install iso, chrooted into my installation and reinstalled the linux package, rebooted, and it worked again.
I have no explanation, this is on a perfectly working laptop with a high end SSD, no errors in memtest, not overclocked, and I’ve been using this Arch install for over a year.
The chances of the package being corrupt when I downloaded it and the hash still being correct are astronomically low, the chances of a cosmic ray hitting the RAM at just the right time are probably just as low, the fact that mkinitcpio doesn’t verify the images that it creates is shocking, the whole thing would have been avoided on an immutable distro with A/B partitions.
Something like this happened to me once. Now I’m on Bazzite on my desktop and Aurora on my laptop.
Pure bliss.
You could have booted the old kernel in Grub.
Doesn’t solve any problem I have. Why switch?
Also, interesting concept the immutable one, but just… Why?
Because it took me a few years to create my perfect Fedora workstation installation.
If one days it becomes bricked, I’d probably switch to an immitable distribution, but I’m sticking with workstation as long as it works.
Also there is no real upside to switching for me.
