Linux Users, What's You Distro Experience?

[audiojunkie]

Here's a more in depth podcast on the subject. This one is specifically referring to Silverblue, but know that there are many distros that are using similar technologies:

[audiojunkie]

This video will open the eyes of some of you why there is no software that you will not be able to run on your chosen next generation Linux desktop.

[audiojunkie]

With Cloud Native desktop technologies, such as: Containerization, immutability, Atomic updates, Flatpaks, AppImages, Toolbx, Distrobox, etc., etc., the future is looking VERY bright for Linux.

[WackyZoundz]

It's just like that best car ever built, it's not supposed to come out of the alpha stage. Because this would ruin the purpose of Linux on desktop. Its purpose is not to be used as a tool to do something else with it, it's supposed to be a craft object you can (and have to) work on endlessly. This is where the fun is, finding ways to make something run on it. And that's fine. But it's borderline insane to claim that an alpha stage OS is on par or even better than Windows or MacOS. Just like my colleague talking about how the best car ever built runs faster than all that "soulless junk" - while his amazing car didn't even have a motor yet...

[audiojunkie]

What's funny is that every time I bring up the next generation Linux technologies that resolve all of the problems that they mention, they are silent and give no response whatsoever. And in Tiles' case, he simply goes back to the same old out dated drivel that he has repeated ad nauseum, like a conspiracy theorist that can't accept reality. I am so thrilled about these next generation technologies, and I love that all of the problems that people complain about have been solved.

For those who are interested in knowing more about what the next generation of Linux is, check out these links (I'm not posting for the haters that aren't interested in actually learning something):



There are several next generation distros out there, but the one that I use is Fedora Silverblue. The new generation of Linux is here now!

So, I haven't commented much (or at all, I can't recall) on this. I think that, at the moment, it's not really a solution for most people who are already comfortable with a distribution, but, in essence, they make containerization a first class citizen within the OS. So, yes, if one is worried mostly about dependency hell, these are a solution because each application has its own version of whatever dependencies it needs. So, they're not going to be space efficient, but for most, I don't think this is a real concern. A bigger problem might be similar kinds of cross application issues that we sometimes see with, e.g., flatpaks. That said, I haven't tried any of these yet so, I'm not sure how valid these concerns may be.

For me, at the moment, the penetration is too low for me to consider them. I know from experience that if you want stability with Linux then you don't want to be on the cutting edge. I may try the fedora ecosystem on one of my spare machines to see how it goes. I have some applications that may work well. I'm absolutely not putting it on my main Linux desktops for now.

A container does not need to be for a single app. It's like an advanced chroot. You have a base OS and kernel that you tweak for audio. You then add whatever distro container that you want on top. For example, Fedora Silverblue with an Ubuntu container and an Arch container. You install all of your DEB files into the Ubuntu container; you install all of your Arch apps into the Arch container. You install your Flatpak apps or Appimage apps onto your Fedora Silverblue desktop. The base OS of Silverblue is immutable/Atomic, and can't be touched. The only things that get installed (in layers) on top of the immutable OS, are the Cloud Native tools that run everything else that is containerized and sandboxed. All apps, whether they come from the Ubuntu or Arch containers or whether from Flatpak or Appimage, shows up on the Fedora Silverblue desktop and is accessed just like any other desktop computer system. Everything is completely safe, and can't touch each other. The user never sees the difference. Because of the ability to roll back immutable installations, there will never be another time where an update trashes your system. If you are a developer, develop for the distro you prefer--it won't affect the user in any way. The user simply has to use a container matching the distro that the developer uses. You created your program binary in Ubuntu? No problem. Install the Ubuntu container and run the program. Did the developer create the app in an old version of Ubuntu and that version is no longer supported with new versions of your OS? Simply install a container of the older Ubuntu version and install the software--compatibility forever! Each of your containers uses the base distro's kernel and settings, so you configure your base system for low latency, and all of your containers and software will be able to run at low latency. This is such a HUGE leap forward!!

[audiojunkie]

It's just like that best car ever built, it's not supposed to come out of the alpha stage. Because this would ruin the purpose of Linux on desktop. Its purpose is not to be used as a tool to do something else with it, it's supposed to be a craft object you can (and have to) work on endlessly. This is where the fun is, finding ways to make something run on it. And that's fine. But it's borderline insane to claim that an alpha stage OS is on par or even better than Windows or MacOS. Just like my colleague talking about how the best car ever built runs faster than all that "soulless junk" - while his amazing car didn't even have a motor yet...

Why would you say that? This is "business" technology that the connected world already runs on. Why would you think it is "not supposed to come out of alpha stage"? The beauty of all of this, is that this is decades old technology that has been brought from the cloud industry and is being utilized in desktops. This is all proven technology. There is no "alpha" of any of this technology. The only thing new is that it is being brought together into a single desktop distro. Fedora Silverblue has its roots back to 2012. It's first release was 2018. Fedora has been releasing twice a year versions for the last 6 years! It's solid. Furthermore, each release improves what is already solid, and makes it easier and easier for normal users to access and use. It's available for all, right now.

In short, I heavily disagree that this technology is anywhere near alpha status. The next generation of Linux is here, and those who bother to learn how to use it will benefit from the technology--which essentially solves all of the old issues that people have complained about with Linux for years. Is there still a learning curve? Yes. Maybe more than regular Linux distros. Do people still need to use common sense? Yes. You need to still make sure each component of the hardware you purchase is compatible with Linux. You still benefit from using popular, Class Compliant USB devices over odd-ball unknown and unsupported hardware. BUT, once you have done your homework, you have a perfectly stable system that is AT LEAST as stable as a Mac or Windows system.

[lunardigs]

Ok whatever, I'll break the ice.

Me:
Hey ChatGPT,
Pretend that you're a person in a forum complaining about Linux, in terms of compatibility and software dependencies. Try to exaggerate a bit, but still sound truthful and real with your concern, yet be biased in terms of seeing Windows and MacOS as superior. Also, keep is short and concise.

ChatGPT:
Alright, here it goes:

Ugh, Linux is such a pain! Every time I try to install something, it's like navigating a labyrinth of dependencies. You need one package for this, another for that, and if you miss a single one, the whole thing crashes or just won't work. It’s like a never-ending puzzle where the pieces are scattered everywhere. Windows and macOS have their issues, but at least their software is streamlined and you don’t spend half your day wrestling with compatibility problems. Plus, they actually provide decent support and updates without needing to dig through forums or tweak a million settings. Linux might be great for techies, but for the average user, it’s a nightmare!

Me:
Ok, great!
Let's modify this a bit though. Try to include the phrase "dependency hell" and also criticize the Linux community for being "toxic" and unhelpful.

ChatGPT:
Alright, here's a revised version:

Ugh, Linux is such a mess! Every time I try to install something, I'm plunged into "dependency hell." You need one package for this, another for that, and if you miss even one, the whole system falls apart. Windows and macOS are so much better—at least their software is straightforward and doesn’t require endless tweaking. And don’t even get me started on the Linux community. They’re incredibly toxic and unhelpful, often brushing off any issues with arrogance. Instead of assisting, they just make you feel like you’re the problem.

You Sir, win the prize!!! This was GOLDEN!!!!!! Bwahhhaaaahahahahaha!!!! I love it!!!!

It pretty much sounds like Tiles, except way less winded.

[lunardigs]

What's funny is that every time I bring up the next generation Linux technologies that resolve all of the problems that they mention, they are silent and give no response whatsoever. And in Tiles' case, he simply goes back to the same old out dated drivel that he has repeated ad nauseum, like a conspiracy theorist that can't accept reality. I am so thrilled about these next generation technologies, and I love that all of the problems that people complain about have been solved.

For those who are interested in knowing more about what the next generation of Linux is, check out these links (I'm not posting for the haters that aren't interested in actually learning something):



There are several next generation distros out there, but the one that I use is Fedora Silverblue. The new generation of Linux is here now!

Right, FOSS has turned out to be an amazing incubator for new innovative stuff.
I forget where I heard it, but the top license used on Github is NONE. And we're already deep in this trend and it's only going to continue, for now. So, this is the future.

[Largos]

It all reminds me of a former colleague and the "best car ever built" in his garage. He kept tinkering endlessly, ordering parts, fixing and testing things but it never worked, never reached the stage to be used on the road. He put a lot of time and money into this car but never drove it, not even once. And then there was his second car, a modern and unspectacular family van he used daily to drive to work or to the grocery store or to get the kids from school. It always worked, never broke down, didn't need much gas, had a good AC and so on - but it was the bad car because it had "no soul". And just like Linux fanboys he became very aggressive whenever somebody told him how illogical he was.

It needs a lot of effort to pull the best car ever built out of the garage and turn it into an actual car that can be driven. Only a company of professionals can do it (like Valve). The hobbyists and nerds are obviously not able or willing to. It needs a company to take Linux away from them. Done is better than perfect.

You're complaining about imaginary monsters under your bed. Weird and wacky.



Here you go, an example of a recording done by a professional recording studio using only linux. Actual pro audio. Have you ever been paid to do anything musically on your computer or do you just like to talk about the best software ever built that's in your hobbyist garage?

[ghettosynth]

What's funny is that every time I bring up the next generation Linux technologies that resolve all of the problems that they mention, they are silent and give no response whatsoever. And in Tiles' case, he simply goes back to the same old out dated drivel that he has repeated ad nauseum, like a conspiracy theorist that can't accept reality. I am so thrilled about these next generation technologies, and I love that all of the problems that people complain about have been solved.

For those who are interested in knowing more about what the next generation of Linux is, check out these links (I'm not posting for the haters that aren't interested in actually learning something):



There are several next generation distros out there, but the one that I use is Fedora Silverblue. The new generation of Linux is here now!

So, I haven't commented much (or at all, I can't recall) on this. I think that, at the moment, it's not really a solution for most people who are already comfortable with a distribution, but, in essence, they make containerization a first class citizen within the OS. So, yes, if one is worried mostly about dependency hell, these are a solution because each application has its own version of whatever dependencies it needs. So, they're not going to be space efficient, but for most, I don't think this is a real concern. A bigger problem might be similar kinds of cross application issues that we sometimes see with, e.g., flatpaks. That said, I haven't tried any of these yet so, I'm not sure how valid these concerns may be.

For me, at the moment, the penetration is too low for me to consider them. I know from experience that if you want stability with Linux then you don't want to be on the cutting edge. I may try the fedora ecosystem on one of my spare machines to see how it goes. I have some applications that may work well. I'm absolutely not putting it on my main Linux desktops for now.

A container does not need to be for a single app. It's like an advanced chroot. You have a base OS and kernel that you tweak for audio. You then add whatever distro container that you want on top. For example, Fedora Silverblue with an Ubuntu container and an Arch container. You install all of your DEB files into the Ubuntu container; you install all of your Arch apps into the Arch container. You install your Flatpak apps or Appimage apps onto your Fedora Silverblue desktop. The base OS of Silverblue is immutable/Atomic, and can't be touched. The only things that get installed (in layers) on top of the immutable OS, are the Cloud Native tools that run everything else that is containerized and sandboxed. All apps, whether they come from the Ubuntu or Arch containers or whether from Flatpak or Appimage, shows up on the Fedora Silverblue desktop and is accessed just like any other desktop computer system. Everything is completely safe, and can't touch each other. The user never sees the difference. Because of the ability to roll back immutable installations, there will never be another time where an update trashes your system. If you are a developer, develop for the distro you prefer--it won't affect the user in any way. The user simply has to use a container matching the distro that the developer uses. You created your program binary in Ubuntu? No problem. Install the Ubuntu container and run the program. Did the developer create the app in an old version of Ubuntu and that version is no longer supported with new versions of your OS? Simply install a container of the older Ubuntu version and install the software--compatibility forever! Each of your containers uses the base distro's kernel and settings, so you configure your base system for low latency, and all of your containers and software will be able to run at low latency. This is such a HUGE leap forward!!

Ah, so I misunderstood that. I thought that every app was individually containerized. I just realized that I have a new box coming on line that this might work well for because it's not dedicated to anything that isn't, itself, experimental, so I'll give it a try and see how I get on. I haven't used fedora for almost two decades.

[audiojunkie]

What's funny is that every time I bring up the next generation Linux technologies that resolve all of the problems that they mention, they are silent and give no response whatsoever. And in Tiles' case, he simply goes back to the same old out dated drivel that he has repeated ad nauseum, like a conspiracy theorist that can't accept reality. I am so thrilled about these next generation technologies, and I love that all of the problems that people complain about have been solved.

For those who are interested in knowing more about what the next generation of Linux is, check out these links (I'm not posting for the haters that aren't interested in actually learning something):



There are several next generation distros out there, but the one that I use is Fedora Silverblue. The new generation of Linux is here now!

So, I haven't commented much (or at all, I can't recall) on this. I think that, at the moment, it's not really a solution for most people who are already comfortable with a distribution, but, in essence, they make containerization a first class citizen within the OS. So, yes, if one is worried mostly about dependency hell, these are a solution because each application has its own version of whatever dependencies it needs. So, they're not going to be space efficient, but for most, I don't think this is a real concern. A bigger problem might be similar kinds of cross application issues that we sometimes see with, e.g., flatpaks. That said, I haven't tried any of these yet so, I'm not sure how valid these concerns may be.

For me, at the moment, the penetration is too low for me to consider them. I know from experience that if you want stability with Linux then you don't want to be on the cutting edge. I may try the fedora ecosystem on one of my spare machines to see how it goes. I have some applications that may work well. I'm absolutely not putting it on my main Linux desktops for now.

A container does not need to be for a single app. It's like an advanced chroot. You have a base OS and kernel that you tweak for audio. You then add whatever distro container that you want on top. For example, Fedora Silverblue with an Ubuntu container and an Arch container. You install all of your DEB files into the Ubuntu container; you install all of your Arch apps into the Arch container. You install your Flatpak apps or Appimage apps onto your Fedora Silverblue desktop. The base OS of Silverblue is immutable/Atomic, and can't be touched. The only things that get installed (in layers) on top of the immutable OS, are the Cloud Native tools that run everything else that is containerized and sandboxed. All apps, whether they come from the Ubuntu or Arch containers or whether from Flatpak or Appimage, shows up on the Fedora Silverblue desktop and is accessed just like any other desktop computer system. Everything is completely safe, and can't touch each other. The user never sees the difference. Because of the ability to roll back immutable installations, there will never be another time where an update trashes your system. If you are a developer, develop for the distro you prefer--it won't affect the user in any way. The user simply has to use a container matching the distro that the developer uses. You created your program binary in Ubuntu? No problem. Install the Ubuntu container and run the program. Did the developer create the app in an old version of Ubuntu and that version is no longer supported with new versions of your OS? Simply install a container of the older Ubuntu version and install the software--compatibility forever! Each of your containers uses the base distro's kernel and settings, so you configure your base system for low latency, and all of your containers and software will be able to run at low latency. This is such a HUGE leap forward!!

Ah, so I misunderstood that. I thought that every app was individually containerized. I just realized that I have a new box coming on line that this might work well for because it's not dedicated to anything that isn't, itself, experimental, so I'll give it a try and see how I get on. I haven't used fedora for almost two decades.

The best part about all of this is that you can adjust into it as slowly as you want, and you don’t have to limit yourself to Fedora. Of course one of several immutable distros will give you the benefit of immutability and Atomic updates, but you can even use your favorite normal distro and get a lot of the benefits by using the following plan:

1. Pick your distro of choice, and try to install as little as possible directly to this OS. You will, of course possibly need drivers or other low level essentials, but the less you install here, the less risk of things to affect your base OS negatively.
2. Instead, use Flatpak based apps as much as possible. You will, of course, have to install the Flatpak system onto your base distro. The Flatpak system files will be one of just a few apps, like drivers, that get installed onto your base distro. Once Flatpak is installed, install all of the available GUI apps you need. You can do the same with Appimages if desired. Everything else that you need will come from containers.
3. Determine what apps you need, and what distros they come from. Use Toolbx or Distrobox to install these. If the tools will be interacting with each other, you’ll likely need to run them all from within the same container. For example, you will likely want to have your DAW, plugins, WINE, and yabridge all in the same container. For example, I could create an Ubuntu container with toolbx or Distrobox, and run my audio software from that one container. You can even have multiple containers of the same type if you wanted to isolate your audio setup from the rest of your system or software.
4. Create your desktop short cuts on your base distro’s desktop. Distrobox has the ability to export application shortcuts to your base desktop. Toolbx requires you to do it manually. This is easy. For example, see this tutorial: https://linuxconfig.org/how-to-create-d ... s-in-linux
5. Use tour base distro like normal—running your apps by clicking on their icons in your base system’s GUI.

Of course, you won’t have the immutability and atomic updates, but you will have most of the technology that next generation Linux uses, while using your current distribution of choice.

[audiojunkie]

Here is a list of immutable distros:

https://distrowatch.com/search-mobile.p ... =Immutable

[Tiles]

Ok, I'll play

Me talking to chatgpt:

A prompt to you from another user elicited the following response wrt Linux vs mainstream OSes.

Ugh, Linux is such a mess! Every time I try to install something, I'm plunged into "dependency hell." You need one package for this, another for that, and if you miss even one, the whole system falls apart. Windows and macOS are so much better—at least their software is straightforward and doesn’t require endless tweaking. And don’t even get me started on the Linux community. They’re incredibly toxic and unhelpful, often brushing off any issues with arrogance. Instead of assisting, they just make you feel like you’re the problem.

Counter this with facts, in particular, point out the exaggeration present in this hyperbolic response. Write your response directly to the poster but do not hide the fact that it is a chatgtp response, I will include this prompt.

ChatGPT's response:

Here's a factual counter to the hyperbole in your response:

It's clear that you're frustrated, but some of your points are quite exaggerated. Dependency issues, often called "dependency hell," were indeed a bigger problem in the past, but modern package managers like apt, dnf, and pacman have largely mitigated this. Most mainstream Linux distributions handle dependencies automatically, and it's rare to encounter issues if you're using supported repositories.

Comparing Linux with Windows and macOS isn't exactly fair, as they serve different purposes and have different user bases. Linux offers unmatched customization, security, and control, which is why it's preferred by many developers, sysadmins, and even in enterprise environments. The software ecosystem is vast and continually improving, with most major applications available on Linux or with excellent alternatives.

Regarding the Linux community, while there are pockets of elitism, this isn't unique to Linux. There are countless helpful communities and forums where people are willing to assist—sometimes it's just about finding the right space. It's worth noting that many of these people contribute their time and expertise voluntarily, which reflects the strong community ethos in the open-source world.

Ultimately, each operating system has its strengths and weaknesses. Linux requires a bit more willingness to learn and adapt, but it offers a level of freedom and control that the others don't.

(Generated by ChatGPT)

Have fun!

That's just a fine example how you can trick ChatGPT to give wrong answers. When you tell it to state the opposite then it will do so. And it did.

[Tiles]

Couldn't resist ^^

somebody said that linux is the best OS to make music at the pc in a professional way. Counter this with facts

ChatGPT:
ChatGPT
While Linux has some strengths in audio production, claiming it as the "best" OS for professional music production can be contentious. Here are some points to consider that might counter the assertion that Linux is superior for professional music production:

Industry Standard Software: The majority of professional music studios use software that is primarily available on Windows and macOS. This includes industry-standard digital audio workstations (DAWs) like Avid Pro Tools, Apple Logic Pro, and Steinberg Cubase. These DAWs are highly integrated with their respective operating systems and offer features and stability that might not be fully replicated on Linux.

Plugin Compatibility: Many of the high-quality VST, AU, and AAX plugins used in professional music production are designed specifically for Windows and macOS. While there are some plugins available for Linux, the ecosystem is not as rich or well-supported as it is on the more mainstream operating systems.

Driver and Hardware Support: Windows and macOS generally offer better support for a wide range of audio interfaces and hardware. Manufacturers often prioritize driver development and support for these operating systems, which can lead to more stable and reliable performance in a professional setting.

User Experience and Integration: macOS, in particular, is known for its smooth integration with music production hardware and software. The user interface and workflow are finely tuned for creative professionals. While Linux offers customization, it may require additional configuration and tweaking to achieve a similar level of integration.

Community and Support: Professional music production often relies on a high level of customer support and resources. Windows and macOS benefit from extensive user communities, professional support services, and regular updates. Linux support tends to come from community forums and may lack the dedicated professional support offered by commercial OS vendors.

Learning Curve: For those who are already accustomed to using Windows or macOS, switching to Linux for music production may involve a steep learning curve. The time spent adapting to Linux could be better used for music creation, especially in a professional environment where efficiency is key.

File Compatibility and Collaboration: Music projects often need to be shared and collaborated on with others who may be using different operating systems. Windows and macOS are the dominant platforms in the industry, making file compatibility and collaboration more straightforward on these platforms.

While Linux does offer some powerful tools for music production, such as Ardour, LMMS, and various audio plugins, the professional landscape is still predominantly centered around Windows and macOS. Each OS has its own strengths, and the choice often depends on specific needs and preferences in a professional setting.

[Tiles]

What surprised me is that the performance is not mentioned. So i dug a bit deeper in the ChatGPT oracle. And when it's about ChatGPT then Alsa with Jack can be as performant as Asio. You need to do some customizations though. ChatGPT gives some clear advices here. You need to install a realtime kernel and stuff. Easy peasy. Shouldn't take more than two or three killed linux installations ^^

As a conclusion i will not longer claim that you have a general performance problem at Linux. I stand corrected. This problem just exists in the standard configuration that is unoptimized, and without the realtime kernel.

However, the question remains how reliable the information is that the performance is comparable once you did the modifications to your system. Because digging even deeper in ChatGPT i ran into the usual wishi washi answers instead of clear facts. And ChatGPT then stopped giving useful answers and was trapped in the usual loop of repeating the same things over and over again instead of answering the questions, started to hallucinate about papers that would prove this point. And when asked for this papers it gave a oops, sorry there are no such papers ...

I apologize for the confusion earlier. It seems there was a misunderstanding about the specific paper I referenced. Unfortunately, there isn’t a specific paper titled "The Linux Audio Desktop" in the academic literature that directly compares ALSA/JACK and ASIO.

And at this point it did not stop hallucinating anymore. The links that it gave me after this point all leaded to Linux pages then, talking about Alsa, without any comparisons against Asio.

ChatGPT is no reliable source unfortunately. It is made in a way to never give a clear answer. The only way to really compare the performance would be somebody with a dual boot system, doing the modifications, and then compare the performance in Reaper for example, with one of the default effect plugins adding into one of the channels until the playback starts stuttering. In both, Windows and Linux.

This would be the only thing that could really convince me.