I love Debian and have a tremendous amount of respect for the people who work on the project. I no longer use Debian, but I think it's vitally important to have an anchor Linux distribution which isn't overly reliant on a for-profit entity and is truly community driven.

Arch isn't truly community driven?

Did they really have much of a moat to begin with?

Only a well-oiled FUD machine that goes into top gear whenever they feel threatened.

Their superpower is bullshitting people into thinking that only their platform can satisfy the rules of evidence that relate to document signatures.

All the more reason to switch to Signal. I use Signal and donate to the non-profit behind it every year because my privacy is worth protecting.

Every time I try to use NixOS I start off excited about all the benefits it can provide, but it always ends up frustrating me in some way and I'm reminded of why distributions exist in the first place. I don't want to have to dig into a config file for every little aspect of my OS to be in working order and then worry about having some hackey workaround when something has issues due to the lack of adherence to the FHS.

> I don't want to have to dig into a config file for every little aspect of my OS to be in working order

When I see comments like this about NixOS I feel like I must have been using a different breed of distro before and switched to a different NixOS than you did.

My experience has been that other distros—even the supposedly stable ones like Debian—are disasters waiting to happen with no clear way of understanding what goes wrong when you do an upgrade and it breaks. Instead of one config file to troubleshoot I have hundreds of config files that I don't even know about that might be at fault. Or it could be not even a config file, it could be that there's a version mismatch that can't be resolved.

For me NixOS's config file is a breath of fresh air. If something on my system breaks it's because I made a change to that single config file. If something on my system isn't working yet it's fixable in that single config file.

The system is far from perfect, but it's much better than the black magic that other distros lean on.

I think having to debug to find problem of your system is frustrating. But with NixOS, I at least won't be afraid of "breaking the system" or doing something "irreversible". This is totally a peace of mind when tinkering with my setup.

I'm not an open source maintainer or even a dev, but it seems bonkers to me that with all the numerous distributions out there, all facing the same problem of package management, that they couldn't just refocus their combined efforts toward improving Flatpak and guiding it toward universal adoption.

Maybe one reason why many "distributions" exist is that they don't feel like "distributing" the same way :-).

Diversity is good. I don't want "one distribution" that chooses the init system, distribution, compositor, window manager, etc. I want to have choice.

When it comes to distributing packages, I personally like system package managers. Not such a big fan of flatpak.

Many people disagree on the idea that flatpack is useful at all.

For example it's completely useless to me. Why do you expect me to help on something I don't use?

By that logic, only GNOME is allowed to exist. No thanks. The people in power often make decisions a big chunk of the community disagrees with.

This is disappointing news. The Save to Pocket feature was one of the core features of Firefox that kept me using it. It feels like Mozilla is circling the drain lately.

For me, the bootc project is one of the most exciting things happening in Linux right now. It would be nice if projects like Debian adopt it as one possible delivery format for those who prefer the atomic containerized workflow way of doing things. There is so much to be gained from a stability standpoint vs how things are done now.

Side note: Judging by what I see on Reddit, the ability to theme a desktop is one of the top reasons someone develops a personal interest in Linux to begin with, so no need to justify that in my book.

I really hope someone high up the chain at Apple reads this post because it's only the tip of the iceberg in describing the myriad of things wrong with Apple's software experience lately. For a company so flush with cash and resources, it boggles the mind how they could let things get this bad.

It's been bad since iTunes became a garbage heap.

There are pockets of competence, but it's not a company priority (even the audio/video apps suffer). That such mediocrity has crept into the OS is even worse.

Feedback doesn’t work so I stopped reporting them. Bugs take about a decade to be fixed and they’re introducing them in a faster pace.

It sends as if nobody at Apple is either a power user or an “abuser” (like many old people who have 50+ email windows open on their iPad because the ui is not very good for them anymore)

I’d love to work at some for a year and only fix bugs and performance issues. It’s very rewarding work imo.

Great that there are people looking into this. I wonder if there would be similar findings were they to perform an audit on MacPorts or the Nix package manager.

Finally got to see the Pet Shop Boys live a few years back and they put on a great show. If you took a survey of the biggest influences on electronic music acts of the early 2000s, my guess is that Depeche Mode and the Pet Shop Boys would be at or near the top of the list.