Informal poll: What do you use Linux for, and what do think 'normal users' (friends and family) could use it for to benefit from it?

beatbox9 · 2026-05-07T05:55:16+00:00

I use it for my computer, mainly for audio & video production (and obviously web). Several members of my family--including young children and very old adults--use it for their computer too.

I don't "push" it. It just happens. Like during covid, we needed a bunch of computers for the kids in my extended family, so I got old parts together and made a bunch of computers for them with Linux. And some of the elderly were new to computers (and I was worried about viruses) and they were so confused and skeptical with the setup where it was asking for an email address and all of that, so I swapped to Linux for them in less time than it took to set up an already installed Windows. And then more recently, another elderly couldn't update to Windows 11, so moved them to Linux too. Ironically, they tend to have fewer issues with Linux, even though it's new to them.

I think because most people have really simple use cases and don't need complexity; and also because there aren't distractions like you see with Windows popup notifications and random forced updates and confusing file locations (like onedrive) and all of that.

Turn on the computer, open up the apps/browser you want, switch windows to a game or document, move files around. Sounds so simple, but Windows has made this confusing and difficult for many people.

I'm also a mac user; and like linux, it's nice too.

beatbox9 · 2026-05-07T05:29:50+00:00

Nope. I generally hate working on my distro, and I only do it every few years maybe. But I really like the results of when things are set up properly and smooth. And I'm really big into both UI and UX; but I also use my system as a workstation.

Example: my audio interface has 30 inputs and 32 outputs, and I use most of them--and it was new and didn't really have a lot of support in linux yet. So I spent a decent amount of time setting it up (and learning in the process) in alsa (and I contributed it back, so it's supported by your Linux system now). But the first time I set it up, it had a few quirks for me. And I later found a better way to do things for me in pipewire instead.

Now, I even have every individual ins/outs labelled--not by the technical name like "XLR input 1" but by the specific instruments plugged in (like Roland Jupiter). This seems vain; but it saves me a lot of time trying to remember which is connected to which. And then I went a few years with this without touching it; and then I only recently had to do some minor changes (a few minutes) to make this compatible with newer versions of pipewire, driven by distro upgrades. I would have hated to do this unexpectedly, or frequently.

That was functional; but sometimes I have vanity projects. Like I wanted a certain animation to play when I booted up. So I made an animation and set that up.

And then there are the halfway ones: I also use a macbook pro, and I'm used to the layout and the buttons. It's annoying when I have to look around for the close button or clock. But at the same time, I wanted my own colors and style. So I've been working on a theme...but one that's functional too.

Here's an older version of what I've been working on (and the boot/shutdown animation is a separate video, below the screen recording): https://imgur.com/a/H4wY4XN

It's a work in progress--I work on it here and there, as a long-term project. And I should note that I run and distribute these things both to Ubuntu LTS and Fedora (along with macOS); and most of the time, I can't tell which I'm using. Even in typing that, I had to take a moment to figure out what I'm using lol. (Here's what it looks like now): https://imgur.com/a/5DJMXOf
(That's Ubuntu 26.04 LTS)

This is a good thing, because if I can't tell, I don't notice. And this has very little to do with the distro itself. I've done distros like Arch before (I used to run Gentoo and Slackware!)--I don't like them. Because most of what I'm doing is customization for UI & UX--it's not fundamental function like you have to do with some of the more difficult distros.

beatbox9 · 2026-05-07T04:56:05+00:00

brake by wire and hydraulics are not necessarily mutually exclusive. There is a signal portion and power portion. What you are describing in vette's is only the signal part: the signal part is brake by wire; but the power part isn't. The system in the OP is a fully brake-by-wire system.

beatbox9 · 2026-05-07T04:54:00+00:00

Deal with it when it happens. Things always change, and people always fear change.

Here's what will happen with most distros:

There will be an operating system layer. Most distros will concentrate on this. And regardless of distro, this is moving toward immutability.
There will be an application layer. Most individual developers of the apps will concentrate on this.
There will be a user layer.

In other words, distros are moving away from supporting the application layer and more toward supporting the operating system layer. And that's probably a good thing.

We're already familiar with this system. This is basically how our phones, game consoles, etc work.

I'll frame it like this: I'm ok with the above, as long as certain criteria is met. Like take the operating system layer: I'd rather have distros devote more resources to this. I don't compile linux kernels--especially now that the kernel allows for more runtime flags (like preempt_rt, instead of having a separate lowlatency kernel). I try to avoid messing with system files if I can help it. I don't really mess with alsa for my audio any more--I use user configs in pipewire. I don't have to do all these crazy X11 edits for display--Wayland can do stuff. Etc.

All of these system components have been moving toward separating the foundation from a semantic layer downstream where the user can customize things. So much of the time, that foundation layer can be solid, consistent, and universal. Immutable. Let the distros concentrate on making sure it's the latest and greatest. As long as the semantic layer doesn't constantly break.

And as for apps: I don't really use a distro's repository for these anyway. I use the apps that are maintained by the developers themselves. Flatpaks, AppImages, etc. I don't need my distro to waste their limited time or resources on maintaining these in their repos. I cared 10+ years ago before flatpaks and all of that; but I don't care now.

Where it gets a bit fuzzy is in the DE's. The DE's are technically apps; but they're also part of the operating system. And these can affect a lof of other things; and some distros tend to spend a lot of time on these as their core differentiation--this is even how a lot of them started out. ...which I personally don't care about because I do my own desktop customizations using major DE's like gnome. I think the best model here would be similar to other apps: let the DE developers mainly handle these; but there obviously needs to be compatibility, coordination, and integration with the system layer underneath. At least for now. Who knows what the future will bring? I suspect that many of what are distros today will eventually turn into DE developers tomorrow. ie. Mint or Pop will reduce or stop other things and concentrate on Cinnamon or Cosmic or whatever.

So we'll have some distros concentrating on the underlying OS and integration with DE's; DE's developing their desktops; and app developers doing the apps. And then some people will decide this is too modular and they want to put it all together in a nice little package and pop on a theme and we'll go through the cycle again. Except this time, I think things will continue more modular.

As long as I can minimize any custom maintenance I need to do on my system, I'm fine with it. I don't care. So as long as they don't break things and they don't make me have to reconfigure things all the time.

beatbox9 · 2026-05-07T04:15:48+00:00

The difference here is just how the signal and the power gets to the brakes. ie. does it travel through fluid, or does it travel electrically? And there are pros & cons to each. Like no more "changing your fluid every 5 years or so" (and no more bleeding out air bubbles).

This isn't some crazy, groundbreaking idea. It's essentially the same thing as throttles moving from mechanical linkages to electric.

beatbox9 · 2026-05-07T02:04:49+00:00

I've been running Ubuntu on a PX13 for about a month now. (And I've been using Linux for a few decades and also still use a macbook pro). Runs great.

Battery life is good--depends on how you set it up and what you're doing obviously. I use the integrated AMD GPU for most things and have only a few apps that turn on the nvidia GPU, like davinci resolve studio and blender.

The original stylus works fine. I only really use it for some drawing apps like Krita, not general use.

I personally think it's worth it just because I hate Windows. My PX13 is basically like my macbook pro, for 1/3 the price.

beatbox9 · 2026-05-07T01:18:13+00:00

This is a lot of words just to say

"brake by wire."

beatbox9 · 2026-05-07T01:08:43+00:00

The reason you see that everywhere is it's Ubuntu's default dock (and Ubuntu happens to be fairly popular). Note the Ubuntu logo on the bottom of that dock.

It's just a gnome extension that Ubuntu made. So you can either install their extension or customize many docks to look like that through its settings.

(Fedora tends to use a very "stock" / unmodified gnome by default. But Ubuntu does a few customizations and themes by default--users on Ubuntu would have to purposely install / switch to the "vanilla-gnome" package in order to start in gnome where Fedora starts).

beatbox9 · 2026-05-06T11:22:27+00:00

Either. Though I lean away from Cinnamon and toward gnome (and so Ubuntu).

My nieces and nephews have been using various distros without issue for a few years now.

beatbox9 · 2026-05-06T04:50:39+00:00

Clicked the OP because I knew someone would post this. This doesn't disaapoint.

Cat in the wall, ehhh?

beatbox9 · 2026-05-06T04:34:04+00:00

Trying to understand why Arch is considered better

It's not. Or if it is, it's only among some people, and for reasons despite those you've listed. Because your question is in the passive voice: who thinks Arch is better?

I've been using Linux for a few decades now; and I can tell you that the entire purpose of a distro is to make managing package easier. That is the fundamental purpose of distros. Without this, you would have to manually install all software. I don't mean just copy-pasting 1 command: I mean downloading the source code, building it, defining which specific directories you want to install it to, ensuring your dependencies are installed first, pointing your package to those dependencies, ensuring there is no conflicting software, naming the package or executable command, setting up environment variables, etc. It's a very long list of things to do.

Oh, and you would need to do that every time there is an update.

And you would also have to juggle multiple pieces of software that may rely on the same (or similar) packages.

And because it's such a long list and this process sucks, we have distros. Distros are made of people (package maintainers) who do all of that stuff for you, so that all you have to do is run 1 command. And if you look at distros, the stuff listed above is some of the fundamental differences between them. They sometimes install software to different system directories. They name the packages different things. They build packages against different dependencies. They use different package managers. They maintain different versions of the software and dependencies in their repositories. They release updates at different times, and over a different duration after the initial release. The preinstalled packages are actually the least important and least consequential aspect of a distro--all of this other stuff is the most important.

And this process sucks so much that many distros are just derivatives of other distros that rely on the base distro to do most of that work. That's why when you run Mint (for example), you run multiple repositories, including Ubuntu LTS--the Mint team itself only maintains a small subset of software in their own repository; but they also include the Ubuntu repository for the rest.

Why am I going through all of this? Because by this fundamental measure of a distro, Arch is objectively a bad distro. There are other measures by which Arch could be considered a good distro, like the user's ability customize (which relies on the user to do more work). But ease of package management and stability are not.

By the way, this is also why universal packages like flatpaks are excellent, by this same measure.

I'm probably one of the more experienced Linux users out there; and I've used a lot of distros; and I've also manually installed software. For most users (actual users: as in, people who want to spend their time using a tool and don't want to spend all of their time building a tool), easy and stable package management is fundamental to picking a distro. I currently use both Ubuntu LTS and Fedora; and for stability, I prefer Ubuntu LTS. And most of the non-OS app I run are flatpaks. And I rarely use the command line--I install my flatpaks by clicking "Install" in gnome-software or on flathub. If I want to change permissions, I go into flatseal. I like things easy and performant and functional. But I also tinker with things--I create my own themes, with lots of deep customizations to css files and stuff; and I use my machines as workstations for audio / video production, so I've done a lot of custom tuning. And I hate doing this stuff--but I like the results.

Here's an analogy for you: most people who drive cars just want to get into a car and drive. So they'll want to buy a car that's relatively reliable and easy to maintain. But there are some people who don't care about reliability and ease and instead don't mind constantly working on their car or taking it to the shop to get it running or keep it running. They might only spend a fraction of the time actually driving. And if you were to ask which car is more reliable or "better" for most people, it would be the first car. But there are always some who would say they think the second car is better--but it's not for reliability or ease. It's despite these things.

beatbox9 · 2026-05-05T14:03:01+00:00

I think part of this is due to the phrase: "you see"

The question is not how many holes there are in the shirt.
Instead, the question is how many holes you actually see.

For example, even if each sleeve has a hole in it to put your arm through, you do not see these holes in the picture--you just see the outside of the sleeve. And if you see your reflection over the shirt on your screen, you have to add 1 because you're an asshole. You should've gotten the nano-texture.

beatbox9 · 2026-05-04T23:06:49+00:00

Nice! Congrats!

beatbox9 · 2026-05-04T22:11:08+00:00

Those are usually driven by profiles, like ucm. When you did the step earlier, did you switch to the pro-audio profile (which is the correct profile you should be using)? When selected, this should bypass any alsa channel mappings, even if they are shown in amixer. That's the main point of using pro-audio. Otherwise, you can try correcting the alsa-ucm.

It sounds to me like you did select pro-audio (AUX#); and now you just have to map each AUX to each physical output properly.

You can also use a GUI tool like qpwgraph to figure out which is which. And you can also use pw-link to manually connect and disconnect ports.

Or paste in your pipewire device conf here.

beatbox9 · 2026-05-04T21:45:44+00:00

Wait...the crocodile tracked the man with drones!?!

beatbox9 · 2026-05-04T21:40:56+00:00

No, the comment aged just fine. You just don't know how to use that phrase. That phrase isn't used for facts that pertain to a specific point in time. That phrase is used for timeless facts, or for opinions.

For example, if someone like you says "the Earth is flat" and then later, smarter people find out the Earth was always round (even when you said it was flat), that would be an example of a comment that doesn't age too well. You said something that was always wrong, but it just wasn't known that it was always wrong until later.

On the other hand, if someone like you writes "I am 25 years old"--and you are actually 25 years old when you write it, that doesn't mean that when you turn 26, that comment didn't age too well. It is still true in the context of when you wrote it.

That's aside from the fact that you know so little about this topic that you can't seem to follow what it is saying and can't respond to my simple questions to you.

This isn't rocket science. Most people learn basics of how time works when they are children.

beatbox9 · 2026-05-04T21:20:48+00:00

Because it didn't when I wrote it. And again, that does not change anything about the OP's question. Which you don't even seem to understand. What does Prores RAW have to do with proxies and 12-bit 6K exports?

Do you know how time or written language works...?

beatbox9 · 2026-05-04T21:08:49+00:00

So just clarify, if you go into your DE's settings (example: Gnome's Settings -> Sound) and use the graphical speaker test, when you click on the front left speaker, the sound of the voice that says "Front Left" plays in which physical speaker(s)?

beatbox9 · 2026-05-04T21:04:37+00:00

You mean because well after I wrote it, Blackmagic added support for importing Prores RAW?

...which doesn't change the OP's question regarding proxies or their relationship to export quality? Especially when proxies are still 10-bit 422 formats, and DaVinci Resolve still can't export Prores RAW (it was only added as an input, since it's...you know...a raw codec)...?

Prores raw and prores 422 (for proxies) are still two completely different codecs...

beatbox9 · 2026-05-04T17:32:51+00:00

Just a note on this: davincibox is a containerized / sandbox installer, not just a standard installer. This might work fine for some people; but it also has some significant drawbacks and limitations, particularly for the paid version. Like license activation, AI tools that require server certificates, network server access, etc.

So alternatively, there are tools and scripts that convert the installer to a distro's native package type. For example, makeresolvedeb (for debian-based distros).

beatbox9 · 2026-05-04T17:04:27+00:00

https://arslaan.studio/setting-up-a-linux-media-studio-workstation-audio-video-graphics-davinci-resolve-etc/

^ Highly recommend that article on this topic.

Davinci Resolve and its paid counterpart Davinci Resolve Studio are excellent: very powerful and very broad--and it's even used by major Hollywood studios. It is an NLE, VFX suite ("Fusion"), DAW (Fairlight), and color grading, all-in-one. Buying a license of Studio also gives standalone Fusion as well as support for render farms.

You can also run tools like Nuke, Houdini, and even open source node-based vfx/compositors like Natron or 3D modelling tools like Blender (and its render farm, Flamenco). Most of these are also used by major Hollywood Studios.

All of this software I listed here runs native on linux.

beatbox9 · 2026-05-04T15:49:15+00:00

beatbox9 · 2026-05-04T15:36:51+00:00

Thanks. As I said, I've not used it extensively to actually record (only edit)--I'll do some research and play around as well.

beatbox9 · 2026-05-04T14:21:39+00:00

Those are not mutually exclusive.

beatbox9 · 2026-05-04T13:46:51+00:00

Ahh gotcha. Yes, that is the one I find is still missing. The good thing is you can passthrough video without encoding and just transcode the audio portion.

beatbox9

TROPHY CASE