woah, that’s a lot of information.
Yeah 😅, lol 😂. The first draft was even longer; so much so that it exceeded the character limit :P . FWIW, I had written two drafts on two different days until I landed on (another day) with the third and final version.
Atomic distros do sound pretty good.
Yup, I can vouch for that.
I might try one someday,
Please do :P
but I’ve already setup Fedora Workstation and am very happy with it :D
Glad to hear that, fam! Enjoy!
Thanks for your detailed reply! Note that in the following writing I’ve chosen to address matters in generalities and oversimplifications for the sake of readability and brevity. No need to drown you in technicalities 😅.
On KDE Plasma vs GNOME, I would like to try both out and see which I like better long-term. KDE Plasma seems a bit more familiar (closer to Windows 10) whereas GNOME is a bit more different but I’m open to using either.
That makes perfect sense. As noted by others, while installing both DEs on the same system is technically possible, it often leads to conflicts and inconsistencies. For the cleanest experience, consider dual-booting with separate installations for each DE. Since you’ve already installed Fedora Workstation, you might want to try KDE on a separate installation.
a laptop with an Intel i7-1360P. It’s one of those 2-in-1 convertible 360 degree hinge laptops.
Your hardware should work well with either DE. For future reference, check the Linux Hardware Database and ArchWiki’s laptop entries for compatibility information. Since you’ve confirmed the touchscreen and rotation are working, you’re already past the biggest hardware hurdles!
I would say I’m open to learning how to work with the terminal and customising the distro a bit, but I don’t want to do anything too out of my scope. I don’t want to spend too many hours setting it up, I’d rather have something that works mostly out of the box :D
Both Fedora and openSUSE nail this balance perfectly. They provide sensible defaults that work immediately while giving you room to tinker when you’re ready.
Stable as I don’t want to break my system after an update. I still want an up-to-date distro though. I am open to rolling release distros, but to my knowledge those are usually less stable with more breaking changes than fixed release options.
FWIW, this is where atomic distros really shine: they offer both stability and current software through their unique update model.
Also, how are the “immutable” distros from UB different from the “mutable” distros?
First, a clarification on terminology: The term “immutable” is actually a misnomer that Fedora has moved away from. These systems aren’t truly immutable – they can change, but in a controlled, atomic way. That’s why Fedora now refers to them as “Atomic” systems, which better describes their update mechanism and system architecture.
Fedora offers traditional Fedora and Fedora Atomic for desktops, with Atomic including variants like Silverblue (GNOME) and Kinoite (KDE). For servers with atomic updates, Fedora offers Fedora CoreOS. Universal Blue (uBlue) enhances these atomic systems with additional features and optimizations.
The key differences between traditional and Atomic systems include:
sudo rm -rf /usr/bin/important-file, but this fails on Atomic systems with an “Error: Read-only file system” message.rpm-ostree status to view deployments and rpm-ostree rollback to return to a previous state.rpm-ostree rebase fedora:fedora/42/x86_64/kinoite.uBlue enhances these Atomic systems with proactive maintenance. A great example: when the kernel 6.13 update introduced regressions affecting flatpaks, uBlue maintainers pinned the kernel to 6.12, protecting all users while traditional distro users experienced crashes documented in Fedora discussions, Reddit, and EndeavourOS forums.
uBlue also offers streamlined setup with better onboarding than almost any other distro, simplified handling of troublesome hardware, and purpose-built variants optimized for gaming, development, and other specific use cases.
Does it just mean that you’re unable to change system-level settings and such/break anything with a mistyped terminal command?
It’s more nuanced than that. While changing /usr contents is restricted, modifying /etc works the same as in traditional systems (though changes are tracked). The real protection comes from the deployment system - even if something breaks, you can easily roll back to a working state.
What are the downsides to using an immutable distro?
There are some trade-offs to consider:
For someone wanting stability without sacrificing current software, uBlue variants (Bluefin for GNOME, Aurora for KDE, or Bazzite for both) offer significant advantages, though standard Fedora remains excellent if you prefer a conventional approach. Your successful experience with Fedora suggests you’re on the right track!
Okay then, new question, for a beginner friendly distro, should I go for Fedora, OpenSUSE, or something else?
OP, consider making up your mind regarding which one between GNOME and KDE Plasma you’d like to use (at least for the foreseeable future). Afterwards, consider answering the following so that we may do a better job at helping you:
Note that both Fedora and openSUSE may be considered beginner-friendly. Though, there does exist some considerable difference in design ethos between these and say something like Linux Mint; the former two give you a relatively bare system and assume (at least some) responsibility from its user while setting up the system. By contrast, Linux Mint offers considerable more hand-holding. This may of may not be to your liking.
Note, however, that Fedora and openSUSE are far from the worst offenders in this regard; within the spectrum, they definitely belong to the better half as we’ve even got distros that assume their users are willing to learn an otherwise useless programming language from scratch. (FYI: I love NixOS and I wouldn’t want it anyway else.)
Therefore, allow me to ask another question:
There’s also the fleet of distros by Universal Blue that some swear by. These operate with a different paradigm; most of its users would describe them as a better alternative for newbies (under certain circumstances). But I digress…
Finally, I have noted how you’ve pronounced your preference for a stable system. I do think I understand what you mean by stable, but just to be sure:
The following has been prepared with help from an LLM. The content is basically mine; it only helped me with wording/phrasing etc. Sometimes, my RSI-like pains come up and I can’t be bothered to do otherwise. Thank you for your understanding:
I saw wireguard tools, isn’t that a kernel module?
The WireGuard implementation has two parts - the kernel module (built into the Linux kernel) and the userspace tools package. This sysext only provides the userspace tools (wg and wg-quick commands), not the kernel module itself.
Although this looks interesting, I have trouble understanding the pro’s and cons vs something like flatpak or containers.
Sysexts fill a critical gap in the Fedora Atomic ecosystem that neither Flatpak nor containers adequately address.
While traditional distros let you install packages natively, Fedora Atomic’s direct alternative to this (i.e. layering) comes with significant drawbacks - updates take longer, require reboots that disrupt workflow, and can sometimes block future updates entirely. This has been a persistent pain point for users.
Flatpaks technically support CLI tools but rarely package them, and containers are impractical for things like shells (imagine running fish or zsh in a container to use on your host). Similarly, applications like Steam or certain browsers sometimes need deeper system integration than Flatpak provides - which is why projects like Bazzite and SecureBlue install them (read: Steam and Chromium-derivative respectively) natively.
The CLI situation has been particularly frustrating, even for Universal Blue, which has driven much of Fedora Atomic’s ever-growing adoption. Their exploration of various solutions (eventually landing on Homebrew) demonstrates how challenging this problem has been.
Sysexts offer an elegant alternative - they provide system-wide integration without breaking immutability or requiring reboots. You intuitively know when to use a sysext versus Flatpak or containers - they’re not competing but complementing each other.
They aren’t a silver bullet (we’ll still need layering for kernel modules, etc.), but for many tools, sysexts provide the solution the immutable OS ecosystem has been waiting for.
I was hoping someone else would step in, but alas…
Look, if your goal is spreading awareness of software freedom, search manipulation isn’t the way 😅
GNU’s approach has become increasingly dogmatic while the ecosystem moves forward. Their stance on firmware blobs and microcode updates creates genuine security problems that projects like coreboot solve with a more balanced approach.
The FSF views software freedom as an absolute, even when it means sacrificing security or functionality - kinda like refusing to use an umbrella because it wasn’t made with 100% free-range organic materials… while standing in a thunderstorm
This is why Torvalds rejected GPLv3 for the kernel and why distros are finding better ways to respect user freedom without the absolutism.
People discover valuable ideas when they solve real problems, not when they’re forced into terminology debates. If GNU’s philosophy is truly compelling, it’ll spread on its own merits, no search engine tricks required!
Why? The likes of Alpine Linux and Chimera Linux don’t adhere to GNU/Linux to begin with. Even Ubuntu has intentions to replace the GNU coreutils with alternatives that have been written in Rust.
Don’t get me wrong; GNU has been instrumental for enabling the Linux ecosystem to begin with and will probs remain relevant (at least to some capacity) for the foreseeable future. However, I absolutely don’t see any reason to be pedantic about this; especially as something like systemd -whether you like it or not- has become a lot more important for what mainstream Linux has become. Yet, nobody in their right minds would even consider to refer to Linux as systemd/Linux (thankfully so).
I was looking for an official documentation entry on this matter to share with OP, ideally something centralized like Fedora’s RPM Fusion or the comprehensive Arch Wiki. While I found various user-created resources, I was surprised not to locate a centralized official documentation page addressing this topic. I’m quite familiar with Linux Mint’s user-friendly approach, so perhaps I’ve overlooked something? I’d be genuinely delighted if someone could point me to such a resource, as it would be tremendously helpful not just for OP but for the community as a whole.
To add to this, a ‘distro’ -if you will- that was launched recently with this theme would be the aptly-named Blue95.
Without trying to be exhaustive:
But all I know about Linux is 1: it’s a cantankerous beast that can smell your fear and lack of computer skills and 2: that’s apparently not true any more?
Exactly.
I’m pretty much a fairly casual PC-user, I don’t do much more than play games.
Noted.
Will my ability to play games be significantly affected compared to Windows?
Your queries on which specific games work and don’t work should be answered between the databases of ProtonDB, WineHQ, Lutris and Are We Anti-Cheat Yet?. Note, however, that these are not necessarily exhaustive (even if put together); e.g. after visiting the aforementioned websites, you might think that Roblox can’t be played on Linux. But it’s simply one of the many games that exist in the compatibility blind spots between these databases; as the excellent Sober isn’t accounted for.
Can I mod games as freely and as easily as I do on Windows?
There will definitely be a learning curve to be had. Though, AFAIK, there’s nothing that outright prevents you beyond an initial (and potential) knowledge gap.
If a program has no Linux version, is it unusable, or are there workarounds?
Wine is your best friend in these cases. Or, an alternative. Note that -again- compatibility blind spots in these databases continue to exist; like this significant one.
Can Linux run programs that rely on frameworks like .NET or other Windows-specific libraries?
Again, Wine comes to the rescue.
How do OS updates work in Linux? Is there a “Linux Update” program like what Windows has?
This depends entirely on the so-called Linux distribution you end up installing. Some opt to do updates automatically (perhaps in the background even), while others simply prompt the user whenever updates are available. Yet others expect the user to do them manually. What are your preferences in this regard?
How does digital security work on Linux? Is it more vulnerable due to being open source? Is there integrated antivirus software, or will I have to source that myself?
This is somewhat of a controversial topic thanks to articles like this one. Note that while the article continues to be shared and thus remains ‘popular’, the fact of the matter is that at least some parts of it have become outdated since. Refer to this (more recent) article as an addendum. The gist would be that Linux might be secure enough for your intents and purposes. But this depends entirely on what you intend to use it for. Downloading and executing random files from the dark web is probs a bit much and not something any OS would appreciate. But playing your games through Steam and surfing the internet should be fine unless you’re somehow targeted by a resourceful adversary. If you didn’t worry too much about this on Windows and thus went with the default settings -so no hardening whatsoever-, then popular distros like Fedora should be more than fine for your use case. However, if you require more than that, then you may find solace in the fact that projects like Kicksecure and secureblue do exist. (There’s also Qubes OS, but I’ll assume that’s too hardcore.)
Are GPU drivers reliable on Linux?
In most cases, yeah. Historically, Nvidia used to be a pita. And, frankly, continues to be for some peeps. But it has improved significantly over the last couple of years.
Can Linux (in the case of a misconfiguration or serious failure) potentially damage hardware?
Any bad software (irrespective of platform) can potentially damage hardware. Linux is no different in this regard. Though you shouldn’t have to worry about this unless you intend do some janky stuff.
And also, what distro might be best for me?
As gaming seems high on your list, consider Bazzite.
FWIW, I actually do understand the difference 😅.
As the term “immutable distro” has -unfortunately- become a misnomer, I went with the (more) descriptive “atomic distro” instead. At least it rings better than names like “distro with transactional updates”, “distro with (some degree of) managed state” or -heck- “distro with anti-hysteresis properties” 😜.
Granted, perhaps the notion (and/or intention) to lump the likes of NixOS together with Endless OS under one oversimplified umbrella term isn’t being helpful either. But I digress…
Though, I find solace in the fact that (at least within these discussions) Gentoo is regarded as a traditional distro 🤣.
Or…, put more formally: Creating and maintaining precise terminology for the diverse Linux ecosystem is incredibly challenging. While nerds like myself would enjoy the classification work, the effort required to keep terms accurate and widely understood in this ever-evolving landscape is no joke 😭.
Anyhow, I might as well hijack the remainder of this comment to thank you and everyone else that made contributions to this discussion. Much appreciated!
Off-topic, but AFAIK the team responsible for the PrivacyTools.io’s content has moved to PrivacyGuides.org.
PrivacyTools is now (mostly) solely run by its original owner and its content has ceased to be reliable ever since the likes of NordVPN and Surfshark have appeared at the top of their VPN recommendations.
While I wouldn’t argue that PrivacyGuides is perfect, it’s undoubtedly better than the alternative. And thus unsurprisingly the actual (spiritual) successor of (what used to be) PrivacyTools.
FWIW, PrivacyGuides doesn’t recommend Ubuntu either.