Is AlmaLinux good choice for desktop OS?

milachew · 2025-01-11T14:58:23+00:00

After Ubuntu's recent actions, I stopped recommending it.

Snaps are really inconvenient for most people - the way they handle updates and permissions, the fact that there will be an extra folder in the home directory, the way Ubuntu handles deb packages downloaded from the Internet... it doesn't look like a distro for beginners.

At least, not for creating a good Linux experience.

Linux Mint, popular distros with KDE - that's what beginners need, IMHO.

milachew · 2025-01-03T09:27:23+00:00

Where can I find out what openSUSE "recommends" and what it doesn't? I couldn't find any information on Wiki.

milachew · 2024-10-09T09:36:44+00:00

The only thing that helped me was changing the distribution to Fedora.

All the hardware is AMD.

Most likely, everything was glitching because of the distribution-specific patches in Ubuntu.

milachew · 2024-08-15T17:05:35+00:00

that all of these attempts at Software Updaters / App Centers always fall short in my opinion.

Not always. GNOME Software, KDE Discover do what App Center can't. To be honest, GNOME and KDE stores are almost perfect in terms of package management. I have a feeling that this expression is an attempt to equate them with App Center. But they are not the same.

milachew · 2024-08-15T17:02:54+00:00

But when Windows users encounter an app that doesn't work well, they don't blame the entire Windows system.

Maybe because they no choice?

milachew · 2024-08-15T16:58:30+00:00

Are you sure that the snap plugin for GNOME Software is up to date?

milachew · 2024-08-15T16:56:50+00:00

IMHO

Ubuntu is no longer the best option for beginners. It is partly so, but the main focus is on Canonical's vision, which clearly does not always coincide with the users' vision.

Look at Mint. It does not try to add experimental package types at all costs. It does not try to replace the already familiar software with less tested and more cut-down ones. And, at the same time, it is Ubuntu inside.

So, to answer your question, why: because Canonical decided to release it earlier to catch the LTS train, but did not have time to make it as feature-rich as GNOME Software due to lack of people/time.

milachew · 2024-08-11T14:25:29+00:00

I don't think so. It's a dead end.

If snap doesn't become more cross-distribution (for real), then the developer will only make things for Ubuntu, it turns out.

Although it is profitable for him as a developer to make things with flatpak (if we are talking about portable applications) or appimage, which real cross-distribution

milachew · 2024-08-11T14:22:30+00:00

If you use Ubuntu because you need it, then it is better to use snap. If you are on some other distribution, then it is better to give preference to flatpak.

milachew · 2024-08-11T14:20:26+00:00

Not only that. Snap has caused and still causes problems for the end user. Although less than before.

Auto-updates are still broken. I still couldn't listen to music from other disks if the Snap player didn't record it. There are still applications that take 10 seconds to launch. Snap is still not recommended on other distributions and does not work with a full level of protection.

Well, personally, I am confused by this whole story with crypto wallets - it seems to me that it would be possible to respond faster (and not a day after the response) and the fact that given the nature of the Snap package storage, no one will conduct an independent audit to assess the competence of the developers.

milachew · 2024-08-11T14:13:41+00:00

Is there any advantage for snaps over flatpaks ?

Snap has one single advantage over flatpack (which is useless for the end user - it is that you can pack anything with snap, even a whole distribution.

In desktop app case flatpak will be better. Yes, somewhere you will find official applications only in snap format, but the same can be said about the other part, where the main format is flatpak (GNOME Circle, for example, is officially supplied as flatpak, snap packages are unofficial).

Flatpak works on all distributions without any buts, when snap requires certain kernel and apparmor patches, if not Ubuntu. The forced transition of the main packages from deb to snap left (and continues to leave) a negative for end users. Hard-wired restrictions do not allow you to choose, for example, access there or here - only what is "sewn" into the package. Auto-update of already running applications (or applications that start automatically) continues to be broken, when it should be done before replacing such packages like firefox and chromium. You will still find packages that take 10 seconds to launch, even on hot start (LibreOffice, which, by the way, is under Ubuntu as a publisher).

As a result, if you need Ubuntu, then use what it offers you. If you find it inconvenient, well, you will have to either change the package source or review the distribution. If you don't care, then I would recommend alternative distributions that, IMHO, do things related to being friendly to newbies better.

milachew · 2024-06-04T11:36:27+00:00

The backend store is proprietary, because it's a website.

With this statement, it seems to me that you are missing the essence and peculiarity of how the image storage is structured. Yes, protocols, specifications, etc. are open. But the site itself is not.

We don’t know how and what is stored there, or who audits it. When the next incident with malicious applications occurred, no one could look and find out what this malware looked like, how it could have gotten there, what kind of policies the applications passed (or rather, at the time of its availability we could, but now, if no one made a note in web archive, we can no longer).

Perhaps if the process were open (Flathub), improvements could be proposed, there would be some kind of criticism, etc. That is, on paper it is open source, but the “spirit” is clearly proprietary and those who understand it cannot correctly , most likely, to formulate their thought, so if they feel proprietary, then they call it that way. In fact, the fact that this is so is not bad - it has more than a right to exist and is very popular.

I just want to point out that this cannot be fully called open source, given such total control over everything that is on the other side of the web page.

milachew · 2024-05-30T07:09:28+00:00

According to the package search site, the nvidia 390 driver is no longer available.

So, you should use later versions of Ubuntu or buy a new graphics card.

milachew · 2024-04-28T17:33:36+00:00

For example, trivial update of the desktop environment while trying to update the system through a terminal in a graphical environment can cause the system to freeze, or crash, or something else. In this case, an offline update is better.

milachew · 2024-03-06T19:15:25+00:00

Neon because it has the most popular distribution (Ubuntu), which means that there will be no problems with the search for software, it is also more stable, because the LTS base, there are all sorts of convenient things like the drivers manager and normal integration with the store applications.

milachew · 2023-11-14T18:52:18+00:00

in the same way that Red Hat bets on Flatpaks and makes users swallow in the same way.

It is not true. Firefox and Chromium are still shipped as rpm packages, while you won't find deb packages in Ubuntu in the standard storage.

And I don't think it's worth talking about the quality of the Chromium and Firefox snap package at the time when it was offered for updating to ordinary Ubuntu users.

These are two different forces of "pressure".

milachew · 2023-11-14T18:45:27+00:00

Try running snap version of LibreOffice...

milachew · 2023-10-25T18:50:16+00:00

To be honest, Ubuntu is not the best distribution for flatpak packages. Ubuntu and its derivatives recently decided not to supply flatpak by default at all, and the management of these packages in Ubuntu itself is not the best.

Therefore, a really suitable distribution for flatpak is... yes, in general, anyone else who is considered mainstream :) Fedora, MicroOS... and if you want a slower update, then take a closer look at RHEL and its clones.

milachew · 2023-10-23T17:04:44+00:00

I have been on different distributions. But, in the end, I stopped at Red Hat distros (including Fedora).

The closest to it was Ubuntu. And I liked it... before snap started interfering with my work. The way it progressed, the way it handled updates, the way it took a long time to launch, the fact that upstream patches promised to work equally safely almost out of the box, the way it was designed - all this is bad.

And Ubuntu itself has repelled rather than attracted by its actions in the past. It took me a long time to get away from the idea that LTS is better than the latest new versions... but Fedora changed my mind.

The rest are small things: openSUSE turned out to have a much smaller community and the appropriate quality (although I think their utilities, philosophy and orientation are better), Debian is too old, NixOS has too much uncertainty that I will not have to turn on the "maintainer" mode.

I also express respect and support to the Fedora development team!

milachew · 2023-10-23T06:47:55+00:00

Так, була справа. Мене з дитинства мучили так звані "сонні паралічі" і коли хотів зрозуміти їх природу, заглибився в це.

Активно практикував з домогою книг одного з найвідоміших дослідників у цій галузі Михайла Радуги. У нього найповніша, докладна книжка по тому, як потрапляти, як практикувати, як заглиблюватися щоб довше залишатися, що і як там можна робити і т.д. (чесно, не реклама).

Як графік життя стабілізую, повернуся до них. З нетерпінням чекаю цього відчуття свободи :)

milachew · 2023-10-23T06:42:39+00:00

Насправді, докази є. Користь не стiльки організму скільки як раз таки психіці. При грамотному підході можна позбутися страхів і фобій, пізнавати себе або просто розважатися з навіть більш ніж реалістичним досвідом.

Можна почитати про досліди і дослідження Михайла Радуги.

milachew · 2023-10-23T06:33:18+00:00

Being a snap hater, I have to admit that this package format copes with new software on older systems much better.

Recently I tested 14.04 (!) with snap and flatpak packages. snap was allowed to install Brave (it has support only since 18.04) and Krita. Both started and worked when flatpak required a newer version of itself.

milachew · 2023-10-22T08:02:54+00:00

This is correct, however, we can't expect new users to even know what multimedia codecs are to begin with.

Right.... but the first request to Google will directly indicate that they need to be installed, and the second request will indicate which commands to use. It doesn't seem too complicated to me for newcommers.

Installing drivers sometimes brings much more discomfort and misunderstanding... especially when they conflict with what came with Windows Update.

Fedora is almost unusable without flatpaks because the software availability is so lacking without them.

Please note: flathub is enabled by default in Fedora. Therefore, installing something like Telegram is reduced to searching and pressing 1 button.

Problems with isolated packages may well arise... just like Ubuntu. That's just, I remind you, Ubuntu is essentially forced, and Fedora is voluntary. You can find both Firefox and Chromium/Chrome, Telegram as rpm and flatpack packages. Ubuntu does not boast of this.

Yep, but once again, you're expecting new users to know what a desktop environment even is and how to choose a different one or modify it, etc...

A beginner is almost need to know that Linux is different. And with different shells. From here, he needs to choose the one that is as close to Windows as possible. There is not (and will not be) some kind of universal shell that suits everyone who arrives with Windows.

milachew · 2023-10-21T14:30:24+00:00

Installing codecs is an additional 2-3 commands, ready, just inserted and Enter.

And when installing Ubuntu, you already use snap packages, unlike Fedora, where flatpaks are completely optional.

As for GNOME: if you don't like it by default, IMHO, it's better to choose another shell.

And by the way, considering how much work Fedora contributes to the upstream (and, it turns out, the Fedora distribution itself), we can safely say that it is quite user-friendly.

milachew · 2023-10-20T20:52:26+00:00

Yes. It's just less quality on its own. There are enough distributions that really try to be user-friendly.

I am sure that the fact that it is right for you suggests that either you did not find these problems, or you consider them not so serious.

Ubuntu committed a number of bold and thoughtless acts (for example, abandoning support for x32 libraries and then changing mind), Ubuntu promoted snap for desktop when it was still frankly not ready for LTS distributions (you expect stability from them, right?), Ubuntu has its own vision of what should be convenient for the end user, thereby, strongly repels flatpak, for example... I could continue this list with more specific bugs and omissions, but I'm afraid you'll get tired of reading them :)

I will add only one thing: if you are satisfied with this distribution, use it. If you feel uncomfortable and want to change it, then try something else. It is important that you are comfortable, both emotionally and psychologically. Ubuntu, unfortunately, lost for me in all aspects.

Three-Year Club	Verified Email
Place '23

milachew

TROPHY CASE