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, 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.

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.

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

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.

How could you install anything or change any setting if it “doesn’t change” ?

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.

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

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

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.

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.)