The article’s “valuing your time” argument is problematic in certain contexts. My brother has had so much trouble with his dual-boot (Windows and Linux). Yes, he could learn how to solve something in Linux every time a problem arises, but he also has to deliver his projects on time. Because of that, he mostly spends time on his Windows dual boot. Yeah, it sucks ethically and has its own pragmatic issues, but he has never had issues resolving dependencies or hunting down the most recent version that can actually be run in NixOS.
I don’t doubt these will become issues that will not be as problematic in the future, but right now my brother cannot use Linux reliably for his assignments.
Edit: My brother has tried what I use: Fedora and NixOS. He has also tried PopOS.
In Fedora, he found some of his software didn’t exist as .deb, and struggled to make .tar files work smoothly for him.
He tried NixOS afterward. He really liked the whole immutability thing, as well as the idea that apps would have their own dependencies.
His dependency problem happened in PopOS. If I remember correctly, it was a code editor that required a version of something that was different to what a package he used in his software was.
I think the order he tried was Fedora -> NixOS -> PopOS -> NixOS -> ? (Haven’t talked to him about it recently)
I would argue that NixOS absolutely is the OS you get if your time is worthless, but not every distro is the same. I’d argue that if you need something that doesn’t have so many issues a stabler or easier to use distro (Debian, Ubuntu, Pop!_OS, Linux Mint, and even Fedora or openSUSE) is going to be a better option than trying to bend specifically NixOS to do what you want.
I personally use a mix of Pop, Debian, and Fedora, not because they’re particularly powerful, but because they tend to be more straightforward for what I want to do than NixOS, Gentoo, or Arch. I don’t mind tinkering, but for my main machines I don’t want to tinker much.
Edit: I should clarify that there are plenty of reasonable uses of Windows and I don’t fault anyone for using it especially if their familiarity is keeping them from understanding Linux as well as they want to. But I also would make the case that there are a lot of distros out there.
I would argue that NixOS absolutely is the OS you get if your time is worthless
Hard disagree. Does it require you to climb through heaps of trash documentation?Absolutely. But, if you persevere, you got yourself a rock solid system that will even make Debian Stable jealous; all while requiring no maintenance.
Better documentation has been made available since relatively recently.
Does it require you to climb through heaps of trash documentation?Absolutely.
That’s why I think the previous commenter’s statement rings true. I’ve been using Linux exclusively for over a decade across multiple distros. NixOS is not intuitive for new or seasoned users, making good documentation vital.
An example: I spent a good weekend day or so poking at NixOS. Live boot worked as expected. When I finished, I had a bootable system but no network stack, despite following the docs. This means that my only route forward would be going back to the live boot since there was no way to pull packages in that state.
I decided to go with Fedora Silverblue as my next test. After dding the image to my USB, it took about 10 mins to get up and running. I was able to setup libvirt and other similar software quick and easy. And once I’m happy, I can write my config to a repo and have my base system wherever, whenever.
I just wanted to offer some nuance to the table. After everything has been learned, enabling some (otherwise complex and obscure) features can be accomplished by a single line in your NixOS config. Like, this efficiency can not and should not be ignored.
You can find some of my thoughts on Fedora Atomic in another comment found under this post. Spoiler alert; for a lot of people, it’s what they seek from NixOS but (by contrast) with excellent delivery. I won’t ignore that it doesn’t have some of the more insane/interesting functionalities that NixOS provides. But, some just want atomicity, reproducibility and (some) declarativity; and Fedora Atomic does deliver on those without requiring you to go into the deep and learn an entire new language that’s only used for managing your distro 😅.
I just wanted to offer some nuance to the table. After everything has been learned, enabling some (otherwise complex and obscure) features can be accomplished by a single line in your NixOS config. Like, this efficiency can not and should not be ignored.
I really appreciate it. I really WANT to like NixOS. The level of efficiency and portability (ex. Nix as package manager) is incredible and, I think, well worth learning about both for users and distros - I hope we see the ideas propagate further. It’s just not in a place that I can be happy using it. But, it is going to tickle some people the right way and that is something that makes me happy.
Fedora Atomic does deliver on those without requiring you to go into the deep and learn an entire new language that’s only used for managing your distro 😅.
This right here is why I’m liking it so far. I’m like Alton Brown is to cooking gadgets when it comes to languages in computing, I really don’t like unitaskers. I get unreasonably resentful of software that forces me to use a DSL (this is a “me” problem).
The article’s “valuing your time” argument is problematic in certain contexts. My brother has had so much trouble with his dual-boot (Windows and Linux). Yes, he could learn how to solve something in Linux every time a problem arises, but he also has to deliver his projects on time. Because of that, he mostly spends time on his Windows dual boot. Yeah, it sucks ethically and has its own pragmatic issues, but he has never had issues resolving dependencies or hunting down the most recent version that can actually be run in NixOS.
I don’t doubt these will become issues that will not be as problematic in the future, but right now my brother cannot use Linux reliably for his assignments.
Edit: My brother has tried what I use: Fedora and NixOS. He has also tried PopOS.
In Fedora, he found some of his software didn’t exist as .deb, and struggled to make .tar files work smoothly for him.
He tried NixOS afterward. He really liked the whole immutability thing, as well as the idea that apps would have their own dependencies.
His dependency problem happened in PopOS. If I remember correctly, it was a code editor that required a version of something that was different to what a package he used in his software was.
I think the order he tried was Fedora -> NixOS -> PopOS -> NixOS -> ? (Haven’t talked to him about it recently)
I would argue that NixOS absolutely is the OS you get if your time is worthless, but not every distro is the same. I’d argue that if you need something that doesn’t have so many issues a stabler or easier to use distro (Debian, Ubuntu, Pop!_OS, Linux Mint, and even Fedora or openSUSE) is going to be a better option than trying to bend specifically NixOS to do what you want.
I personally use a mix of Pop, Debian, and Fedora, not because they’re particularly powerful, but because they tend to be more straightforward for what I want to do than NixOS, Gentoo, or Arch. I don’t mind tinkering, but for my main machines I don’t want to tinker much.
Edit: I should clarify that there are plenty of reasonable uses of Windows and I don’t fault anyone for using it especially if their familiarity is keeping them from understanding Linux as well as they want to. But I also would make the case that there are a lot of distros out there.
Hard disagree. Does it require you to climb through heaps of trash documentation? Absolutely. But, if you persevere, you got yourself a rock solid system that will even make Debian Stable jealous; all while requiring no maintenance.
That’s why I think the previous commenter’s statement rings true. I’ve been using Linux exclusively for over a decade across multiple distros. NixOS is not intuitive for new or seasoned users, making good documentation vital.
An example: I spent a good weekend day or so poking at NixOS. Live boot worked as expected. When I finished, I had a bootable system but no network stack, despite following the docs. This means that my only route forward would be going back to the live boot since there was no way to pull packages in that state.
I decided to go with Fedora Silverblue as my next test. After dding the image to my USB, it took about 10 mins to get up and running. I was able to setup libvirt and other similar software quick and easy. And once I’m happy, I can write my config to a repo and have my base system wherever, whenever.
I just wanted to offer some nuance to the table. After everything has been learned, enabling some (otherwise complex and obscure) features can be accomplished by a single line in your NixOS config. Like, this efficiency can not and should not be ignored.
You can find some of my thoughts on Fedora Atomic in another comment found under this post. Spoiler alert; for a lot of people, it’s what they seek from NixOS but (by contrast) with excellent delivery. I won’t ignore that it doesn’t have some of the more insane/interesting functionalities that NixOS provides. But, some just want atomicity, reproducibility and (some) declarativity; and Fedora Atomic does deliver on those without requiring you to go into the deep and learn an entire new language that’s only used for managing your distro 😅.
I really appreciate it. I really WANT to like NixOS. The level of efficiency and portability (ex. Nix as package manager) is incredible and, I think, well worth learning about both for users and distros - I hope we see the ideas propagate further. It’s just not in a place that I can be happy using it. But, it is going to tickle some people the right way and that is something that makes me happy.
This right here is why I’m liking it so far. I’m like Alton Brown is to cooking gadgets when it comes to languages in computing, I really don’t like unitaskers. I get unreasonably resentful of software that forces me to use a DSL (this is a “me” problem).