38
NixOS is the endgame of distrohopping - Joshua Blais (joshblais.com)
submitted 1 year ago by to c/linux@programming.dev
31 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

cross-posted from: https://programming.dev/post/36606182

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] -7 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Yeah, so LITERALLY ANY OTHER DISTRO, that says it's a Desktop Edition is a better choice.

What are we doing here? This isn't even an argument. It's a settled fact based on the documentation alone. You're trying to push a square before into a circle hole.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 5 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    What are we doing here? This isn’t even an argument.

    Correct, this isn't an argument, or at least I'm not trying to argue.
    All I wanted to learn what exact properties you though makes for a better desktop OS.

    I'm in agreement that NixOS isn't the best for mainstream desktop user base, but like any decent inquiry or survey, if I just preemptively bias someone's responses with my own observations on NixOS defecenties, then there wouldn't be as much of a case to before ask what they think other Linux Distro do better in the first place.

    Not everyone who strikes up a convo online for a debate, and not all (but quite a few) who ask questions are trolls.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [+] -7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    You're being told over and over that Mix is not that. Move on.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 4 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Well let me at least leave why I think Nix is not it at the moment:

    • Software Center - browsing search.nixos.org isn't quite the same in terms low friction and discoverability
      • You already have to know what you're looking for, and it can't make system config on your behalf
      • Debian or conventional package managers usually offer a native GUI for package selection and deployment
    • System Defaults - the minimality of a basic default install can cause a lot of papercuts
      • the default boot partition is rather small given the OS's prepecity to add new kernels with new generations
      • and without any garbage collection service enabled by default, user first encounter switch failures due to this
    • External Binaries Compatibility - Linux also suffers from this in general as compared to MacOS or Windows
      • in addition to being much more niche, reuse of existing binaries from more prevalent distros becomes complicated
      • the desktop ISO could suggest a nix-ld config with default libs most binary distributes expect, easing in new users
    • The Nix language - much more complex than conventional cong markup langs, being more of a turing complete DSL
      • partial working LSP impare introspection while writing, and the runtime error messages are poorly formatted
      • most desktop users (in debian or fedora) have little need to learn their OS's packaging schemas, but NixOS users do
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] -5 points 1 year ago

    You're speaking subjectively. Thays the first problem.

    Nix was built for people like me who need a binary compatible build system to be replicable every single time, and present no false positives.

    You're just...talking about a way you can customize it. It's a feature of major distro, you just didn't know. Do some research 😘

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent