What makes this so interesting to me is not that it is immutable, per se, but that it allows, or will allow the install from multiple sources - apt, dnf, pacman, snap, appimage, etc. If they can pull this off (and have an option to leave out the immutable part), it may end up being a very good desktop OS. Testing this now in a VM. BTW, don't enable 3D acceleration in VirtualBox during the install.
And just a few days ago blendOS comes around the Corner and does the same thing (maybe even better) based on Arch from the 13 year old Linux Genius who became an official flavour of Ubuntu with Ubuntu Unity. Gonna be an interesting year for Linux
It would be awesome if they added a tiny11 container. I am a refugee from windows and still have some applications, which I've not found a Linux app for my work flow. I'm not interested in a full Virtual Machine but a system with containers for the odd windows app provides a good solution for my use case.
I know that most people these days could care less about hard drive space, since hard drives are in the terabyte range, but this still matters to me. I just think it's wasteful for an OS to want to containerize everything. This is why I don't use snap, flatpak, or any other similar format as a regular practice. I'll use them if it's a program I need and it's not in the repos, and I don't mind the snaps that Ubuntu requires. But when there are a lot of programs you need to install on a system, as I do, installing everything from the repos on Ubuntu, Debian, or Arch makes an install size of 15-25 GB, leaving plenty of space for your projects. An OS that uses flatpak, snap, or some other container for all programs can easily have 10 times the install size after installing everything you need. If you're using a PC or laptop with a 250-500 GB drive, that matters. I use an OS that has everything I need in the repos, and I don't deal with fork distros, except Linux Mint. Ubuntu is the best for current software and stability, so Ubuntu Cinnamon 22.10 is my daily driver. (Not Ubuntu Cinnamon Remix. Ubuntucinnamon from the repos. I install Ubuntu, then install ubuntucinnamon.) I also use Debian Sid and Arch, but both live up to their "unstable" classification. Not great daily drivers. I mentioned Linux Mint. I like it a lot, but I like Ubuntu Cinnamon better. VanillaOS would greatly annoy me. But I enjoyed the video.
Storage and computing power becoming -more affordable- less overpriced is no excuse for developers to skimp on optimization. Yet everywhere we see laziness and corner-cutting leading to bad optimization these days. For example, try finding a recent triple A game that either doesn't ask for high double to triple digit gigs of drive space, or actually **needs** every bit of space it uses.
I've worked in Windows and UNIX a lot, but Linux very little. Apps from other distros is not interesting to me. What is, is the containerization of apps so when an app gets behind, it still works, e.g. no dll hell. It's interesting, but I don't think I will go here. It will probably be stock Ubuntu or AlmaLinux.
User friendly/quality of life "bloat" and brand association. For better or worse, Canonical has become a major player in the Linux space, and as a result, lots of software gets an Ubuntu version before any other distributions are supported. And it's easier to get debian specific software working on ubuntu than vice versa.
@@kpcraftster6580 true, but bloat does not need to be a bad thing. As that keeps the installation easy for new users. Ubuntu and later Linux mint (after the unity debacle) where my entry point to Linux. And thanks to the bloat it just works on most systems. Now I run EndeavorOS and know how to troubleshoot it and Arch (which I did run for a while). But for those who switched to Linux the bloat might as well keep them here.
I've installed it on my EXTRA drive- (250 gig)..and will leave it on that one til they change over to DEBIAN and see what other changes they do... may like it - may not.. we'll see. Seems they are doing it fairly quickly.
When DT did a video on Vanilla, my initial impression was that it was sort of a cross between Bedrock and Nixos. But upon reflection its package solution is far less elegant than Nix. Instead of offering distribution agnostic packages, let alone purely functional ones, it uses compatibility layers to install alpine, aur and rpm containerized packages next to deb ones. Of course, you can choose to use appimages and flatpaks, but it is not Vanilla's primary packaging model. So Vanilla is just like immutable Ubuntu (or rather an immutable Mint, since snaps have been replaced by flatpaks) with some compatibility layers. The way I see it, it just adds extra complexity without offering any real security enhancements. And as far a package management is concerned, it is a step in the wrong direction (i.e. bootstrapping foreign packages with disregard for any assumptions they may contain, e.g. about initramfs, instead of using agnostic packages or compiling from source).
I agree this distro should have been based on Debian, I'm not a fan of Vanilla Gnome, and it seems a bit complicated for my taste, so because of that I'm gonna pass for the time being.
THEY HAVE A NOTICE on their website--- that they are MOVING the base to DEBIAN soon..... As far as snaps-- I HOPE THEY LEAVE THEM OUT-- snaps are CRAP.. period.. RIGHT NOW it's close to perfect--- I love this-- I've absolutely HATED gnome for YEARS-- LOATHED it was the accurate term....BUT I am loving the gnome44 in this-- although they say that Vanilla "changed" it and they will soon CHANGE IT BACK when it goes to Debian. I hope they don't fu..k it up when it does.. because I'm LOVING this-- first time I EVER liked gnome. AND this does the containers FOR you-- so I don't have to worry about all that crap..
I have heard and watched that Vanilla OS is a Closed system........Vanilla may be a Very Nice Linux OS ....but .....it is ... kind of ..... Closed Linux OS .... soft of MacOS ...and ...I'm like, what's the point ? ha ha
Thanks for the video, very detailed. Small side note: we are working to reduce root partitions, the goal is to fall below 10GB per partition.
Awesome!
This has been my main os for the past month and it has been amazing, I will be keeping this forever if possible
What makes this so interesting to me is not that it is immutable, per se, but that it allows, or will allow the install from multiple sources - apt, dnf, pacman, snap, appimage, etc. If they can pull this off (and have an option to leave out the immutable part), it may end up being a very good desktop OS. Testing this now in a VM. BTW, don't enable 3D acceleration in VirtualBox during the install.
And just a few days ago blendOS comes around the Corner and does the same thing (maybe even better) based on Arch from the 13 year old Linux Genius who became an official flavour of Ubuntu with Ubuntu Unity.
Gonna be an interesting year for Linux
I installed it on bare metal laptop and it installed fine but bricked itself after the first update. I moved on. Might try again in a few months.
It would be awesome if they added a tiny11 container. I am a refugee from windows and still have some applications, which I've not found a Linux app for my work flow. I'm not interested in a full Virtual Machine but a system with containers for the odd windows app provides a good solution for my use case.
Winetricks?
Try using bottles
hey Troy, this is a good video. What about extensions for GNOME on this installation. Are those possible to install?
Yes, I can even install i3
I know that most people these days could care less about hard drive space, since hard drives are in the terabyte range, but this still matters to me. I just think it's wasteful for an OS to want to containerize everything. This is why I don't use snap, flatpak, or any other similar format as a regular practice. I'll use them if it's a program I need and it's not in the repos, and I don't mind the snaps that Ubuntu requires. But when there are a lot of programs you need to install on a system, as I do, installing everything from the repos on Ubuntu, Debian, or Arch makes an install size of 15-25 GB, leaving plenty of space for your projects. An OS that uses flatpak, snap, or some other container for all programs can easily have 10 times the install size after installing everything you need. If you're using a PC or laptop with a 250-500 GB drive, that matters. I use an OS that has everything I need in the repos, and I don't deal with fork distros, except Linux Mint. Ubuntu is the best for current software and stability, so Ubuntu Cinnamon 22.10 is my daily driver. (Not Ubuntu Cinnamon Remix. Ubuntucinnamon from the repos. I install Ubuntu, then install ubuntucinnamon.) I also use Debian Sid and Arch, but both live up to their "unstable" classification. Not great daily drivers. I mentioned Linux Mint. I like it a lot, but I like Ubuntu Cinnamon better. VanillaOS would greatly annoy me. But I enjoyed the video.
Storage and computing power becoming -more affordable- less overpriced is no excuse for developers to skimp on optimization. Yet everywhere we see laziness and corner-cutting leading to bad optimization these days. For example, try finding a recent triple A game that either doesn't ask for high double to triple digit gigs of drive space, or actually **needs** every bit of space it uses.
I've worked in Windows and UNIX a lot, but Linux very little. Apps from other distros is not interesting to me. What is, is the containerization of apps so when an app gets behind, it still works, e.g. no dll hell. It's interesting, but I don't think I will go here. It will probably be stock Ubuntu or AlmaLinux.
The reason they choose Ubuntu might be because of hardware consideration? Since Ubuntu's software is often newer.
Does immutable mean that Malware cannot change the settings?
Is it hack proof?
It is generally more hack resistant, but only if the malware is targeting changes to the core OS.
Thats something I never got. Why would anything base on Ubuntu if it throws all the Ubuntu stuff away again? 🤔🤔🤔
Hardware support?
User friendly/quality of life "bloat" and brand association. For better or worse, Canonical has become a major player in the Linux space, and as a result, lots of software gets an Ubuntu version before any other distributions are supported. And it's easier to get debian specific software working on ubuntu than vice versa.
@@kpcraftster6580 true, but bloat does not need to be a bad thing. As that keeps the installation easy for new users.
Ubuntu and later Linux mint (after the unity debacle) where my entry point to Linux. And thanks to the bloat it just works on most systems.
Now I run EndeavorOS and know how to troubleshoot it and Arch (which I did run for a while). But for those who switched to Linux the bloat might as well keep them here.
@@DJNightchild Quite. "Bloat" is a very subjective term. One man's "bloat" is another man's major selling point.
I've installed it on my EXTRA drive- (250 gig)..and will leave it on that one til they change over to DEBIAN and see what other changes they do... may like it - may not.. we'll see. Seems they are doing it fairly quickly.
When DT did a video on Vanilla, my initial impression was that it was sort of a cross between Bedrock and Nixos. But upon reflection its package solution is far less elegant than Nix. Instead of offering distribution agnostic packages, let alone purely functional ones, it uses compatibility layers to install alpine, aur and rpm containerized packages next to deb ones. Of course, you can choose to use appimages and flatpaks, but it is not Vanilla's primary packaging model.
So Vanilla is just like immutable Ubuntu (or rather an immutable Mint, since snaps have been replaced by flatpaks) with some compatibility layers. The way I see it, it just adds extra complexity without offering any real security enhancements. And as far a package management is concerned, it is a step in the wrong direction (i.e. bootstrapping foreign packages with disregard for any assumptions they may contain, e.g. about initramfs, instead of using agnostic packages or compiling from source).
Hang on, the software store offers flatpaks but doesn't integrate flathub (judging by the very limited choice of available flatpaks on offer) ...Why?
I would love an immutable LMDE!
I agree this distro should have been based on Debian, I'm not a fan of Vanilla Gnome, and it seems a bit complicated for my taste, so because of that I'm gonna pass for the time being.
The fact it comes vanilla, makes it easier for you to customize it to your taste
VanillaOS is now going to be switching to Debian Sid.
That would be awesome
THEY HAVE A NOTICE on their website--- that they are MOVING the base to DEBIAN soon..... As far as snaps-- I HOPE THEY LEAVE THEM OUT-- snaps are CRAP.. period.. RIGHT NOW it's close to perfect--- I love this-- I've absolutely HATED gnome for YEARS-- LOATHED it was the accurate term....BUT I am loving the gnome44 in this-- although they say that Vanilla "changed" it and they will soon CHANGE IT BACK when it goes to Debian. I hope they don't fu..k it up when it does.. because I'm LOVING this-- first time I EVER liked gnome. AND this does the containers FOR you-- so I don't have to worry about all that crap..
I have heard and watched that Vanilla OS is a Closed system........Vanilla may be a Very Nice Linux OS ....but .....it is ... kind of ..... Closed Linux OS .... soft of MacOS ...and ...I'm like, what's the point ? ha ha
Ubuntu is way more solid base than Debian that is so dated. I think they got it right
I mean like even ubuntu's design is really old from todays standards
SCREW SNAPS-- they're better off LEFT OFF completely anyway..
hey Switched to Linux have you heard of big linux? could you check it out
I added it to my list to DL
@@SwitchedtoLinux thanks you i can't wait to see your review
Nice
I'd rather just use Debian Sid than Ubuntu or any of it's forks
Why Debian Sid? Arch is a better rolling option, or Tumbleweed, Solus, OpenMandriva, PCLinuxOS...
debian is way more comfortable to use for its apt command rather than pacman.
@@AlbertXuY LOL!
@@Amos_Huclkeberry I clearly said over UBUNTU.
(Far wider number of apps…)