New Distro 'blendOS' Combines Arch Linux, Fedora Linux and Ubuntu (9to5linux.com) 73
"From the maintainer of Ubuntu Unity and the Unity desktop environment, here comes blendOS," writes 9to5Linux, "a GNU/Linux distribution that aims to be the last distribution you'll ever use, especially if you distro hop."
blendOS is here to offer you "a seamless blend of all Linux distributions," as its creator wants to call it. blendOS is based on Arch Linux and GNOME on Wayland, but it lets you use apps from other popular distributions, such as Fedora Linux or Ubuntu.
This is possible because you can use the native package managers from Arch Linux (pacman — included by default), Fedora Linux (dnf), and Ubuntu (apt), which are included as containers using Distrobox/Podman. However, the DNF and APT package managers aren't included in the live ISO image, nor blendOS's own blend package manager.... It also follows a rolling release model, since it's derived from Arch Linux.
Even if it comes with the GNOME desktop by default on the live ISO image, blendOS will let you deploy a new installation with another popular desktop environment, such as KDE Plasma, MATE, or Xfce, or even window managers like Sway or i3. Apart from the fact that you can install any app from any of the supported Linux distributions, blendOS also comes with out-of-the-box support for sandboxed Flatpak apps, which you can easily install directly from the Flathub Store app, which is a Web App that puts the Flathub website on your desktop.
This is possible because you can use the native package managers from Arch Linux (pacman — included by default), Fedora Linux (dnf), and Ubuntu (apt), which are included as containers using Distrobox/Podman. However, the DNF and APT package managers aren't included in the live ISO image, nor blendOS's own blend package manager.... It also follows a rolling release model, since it's derived from Arch Linux.
Even if it comes with the GNOME desktop by default on the live ISO image, blendOS will let you deploy a new installation with another popular desktop environment, such as KDE Plasma, MATE, or Xfce, or even window managers like Sway or i3. Apart from the fact that you can install any app from any of the supported Linux distributions, blendOS also comes with out-of-the-box support for sandboxed Flatpak apps, which you can easily install directly from the Flathub Store app, which is a Web App that puts the Flathub website on your desktop.
not a bad idea (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Are they going to write yet another program to manage network interfaces? Just how do you change an ip address these days without bringing the interface down and back up again?
Re: even worse (Score:2)
What's wrong with doing that? It helps with discovery.
Re: (Score:2)
Hell even Windows doesn't do that. Literally for decades from VAX to Sparc to Alpha to x86 you didn't need to bring an interface down to change an address. Just ifconfig and it instantly changed. Now I find it faster to unplug the usb dongle than search for the software switch to turn the interface off. Now we have have the ip command that does everything ifconfig used to, just with a slightly different and worse syntax.
Re: even worse (Score:2)
I still don't see what's wrong with cycling it. Does it break something? When you cycle it you implicitly send a gratuitous ARP, and depending on the hardware also clear any error states.
Re:not a bad idea (Score:4, Insightful)
Who's this geared towards? (Score:5, Interesting)
This sounds like trying to make the most bloated distro one could imagine. Ever hear of pick a lane? Seriously, this must be the Microsoft approach where you just include everything and anything and hope for the best.
At least I won't be forced into this and I'll still have a choice on which distro best fits my needs. Different problems require different solutions.
I'm happy with Xubuntu on my desktop but could definitely see using something entirely different for a server. I ran Slackware for a while and it also had it's pluses and minuses. If I needed a server I may go that route and get it slimmed down as much as possible and it would have read-able log files.
So I'm glad some people have the ability to make this bloatware and I'm equally glad I don't have to use it.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If you need a certain app, just go get and it's associated libraries. You don't need every library ever made, you just get what you need. It takes less space up, lowers your surface area for attack and can keep the system less clogged with crap.
I usually start with the slimmest installation of a distro and add what I need as I go along. Why include stuff you don't need? Not like you cannot get it later when you do need it. If you ever do.
Re: Who's this geared towards? (Score:1)
"a seamless blend of all Linux distributions" (Score:1)
Except these are all debian-based ( except arch ). Add RHEL-based distros and we may have a deal. In the meantime, obligatory xkcd: https://xkcd.com/927/ [xkcd.com]
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
This will come as news to Fedora
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
I guess I read the distro list too fast...
No thanks (Score:5, Insightful)
>"that aims to be the last distribution you'll ever use, [...] based on Arch Linux and GNOME on Wayland, [...] sandboxed Flatpak apps "
I don't want to use Gnome OR Wayland OR Flatpak apps. So it already isn't a distribution I want to use. Yes, I could change all that, but I can start with Mint and already have what I want. Might be interesting for some people, though.
And from the website: "blendOS is an immutable operating system. This means your filesystem is read-only, thus resulting in stable experience."
Eeeew. No thanks. My vision of a Linux distro isn't one that is already horriblely out of line with what I want to use, but one that promotes being even more complicated, locked-down, and using "paks" that eat up tons of space and become even more complicated to configure, troubleshoot, and manage.
Re: (Score:2)
... Wayland, ... read-only...
It is for hipsters, so of course you don't need to re-think their choices. They already know, and told you.
...even more complicated to configure, troubleshoot, and manage.
Definitely not targeted at users who would configure, troubleshoot, or manage.
Re: (Score:2)
My vision of a Linux distro isn't one that is already horriblely out of line with what I want to use, but one that promotes being even more complicated, locked-down, and using "paks" that eat up tons of space and become even more complicated to configure, troubleshoot, and manage.
Oh, so you've used a Steam Deck, too.
The least they could have done is have that "immutable image" include Samba...
It's time for few LESS distros (Score:5, Interesting)
I know 2 people who were thinking of moving from Windows to Linux but the sheer number of distros with at ton of recommendations for each baffled them as they're not professionals, just regular users. In the end 1 didnt bother and stayed with Redmond and the other bought a Mac. The reality of human psychology is that too much choice is as bad as too little, people just cant be arsed to spend time deciding. If linux wants to make inroads onto the average Joe's desktop it really needs to be narrowed down to maybe 2 or 3 distros.
Re: (Score:3)
Why would not they use Ubuntu? This is distribution for the normal users.
Re: It's time for few LESS distros (Score:2)
Whoosh......
Re: (Score:2)
Why would not they use Ubuntu? This is distribution for the normal users.
Whoosh......
Whoosh!
Re: (Score:2)
Whoosh ^ 2
Re: (Score:2)
lol what?! You didn't understand somebody's point, so you said "whoosh."
Saying this is always a self-whoosh. By definition, it means you didn't understand why the person was making the comment that they did; but you presume they missed the point. But here, it was their point! They can't have missed it. You can only be an idiot and whoosh yourself. As an observer, it is obviously that you're just too stupid to understand that a person might make a point different than whatever you would have said.
And you thi
Re: (Score:2)
Oh dear, did ickle snowflake get triggered?
Here's the deal fuckwit - I said a normal user would be overwhelmed by choice, he said they should use Ubuntu because its for normal users. Point is , how would they know if they know nothing about Linux??
Understand now moron? Or does angry ickle man need it spelt out in crayon?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:It's time for few LESS distros (Score:4, Informative)
>"Why would not they use Ubuntu? This is distribution for the normal users."
Actually, Mint (Cinnamon) would probably be better in every respect. It does not the disaster known as Gnome yet has all the same package availability as Ubuntu. Installation is easy, and management is pretty straight-forward. It is what I recommend for most people at this point.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
I know 2 people who were thinking of moving from Windows to Linux but the sheer number of distros with at ton of recommendations for each baffled them as they're not professionals, just regular users.
There are more than 3 or 4 flavors of Windows that you can buy right now. Today you could buy a license through a reseller for three or four versions of Windows 8, at least three versions of Windows 10, and three versions of Windows 11 (plus there's another version that only comes with low end education notebooks.)
Re: It's time for few LESS distros (Score:3)
Try and buy new a PC with win 8 installed and let us know how it goes. Theres one "official" choice of windows for home users right now and it comes pre installed. Plug and play is what normal users want.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Try and buy new a PC with win 8 installed and let us know how it goes. Theres one "official" choice of windows for home users right now and it comes pre installed.
Absolutely correct. But there's only one most popular Linux distribution, and none of the others are so much better that it makes sense for the new user to choose anything else. Even if they decide GNOME sucks, they can just leave it installed on anything but the most resource-constrained systems, and install kde-desktop and use it instead — if someone asked me, I would probably prefer to give them Kubuntu, but enough big-time applications have various GNOME library dependencies that you'll need most
Re: (Score:2)
There are more than 3 or 4 flavors of Windows that you can buy right now. Today you could buy a license through a reseller for three or four versions of Windows 8, at least three versions of Windows 10, and three versions of Windows 11 (plus there's another version that only comes with low end education notebooks.)
And they're literally identical if you sat a user it front of them. It boils down to this. Consumers, people that need to connect to a domain (business) and then servers.
Someone needs to install Chrome on this new distro. Do they use the rpm, the deb, the flatpack, the docker container, or whatever package manager someone cooked up this week?
Re: (Score:2)
?There are more than 3 or 4 flavors of Windows that you can buy right now.
And they're literally identical if you sat a user it front of them.
They include different software, they have different limitations, they have some different configuration out of the box. You can still buy a PC with Windows 10 installed (they're still in the channel) which has the usual assortment of worthless UI differences from Windows 11... The idea that Windows is one thing is outright false.
Re: (Score:1)
Distros? Distros don't matter and the real choices are exactly two: .deb based and .rpm based (for "normal" users, source based, rolling release and such doesn't matter).
Yes, there is a tough choice, but not with distros but with desktops (I assume your hypothetical "normal" users are desktop users). And the problem is, all Linux desktops suck, each in its own way. Sure, once you get used with one, you can do your job just fine,
Re: It's time for few LESS distros (Score:2)
Right, because every non techie knows what .rpm and .deb are and the pros and cons or each.
Congratulations on completely and utterly missing the fucking point.
Re: It's time for few LESS distros (Score:2)
Except your regular joe doesnt know ubuntu if for regular Joe's because hes never heard of it.
Re: (Score:2)
Regular joes have heard of Ubuntu. Because one of the first replies after asking "I want to try Linux, what should I try?" will be "Just get the latest version of Ubuntu and get started quickly".
The problem is, the thread quickly devolves into a flame war because the post following will say "Ubuntu sucks and it is not Linux. You must use my preferred distribution". Followed by flame wars and poor Joe is left haples
Re: It's time for few LESS distros (Score:2)
Yup. Everybody just recommends Ubuntu, really. Or maybe Kubuntu because a fresh windows user can tinker with the settings and make as familiar as they want.
That's what I do, and I've been an RHEL work/Fedora home user for years. Ubuntu just does such a good job holding your hand for stuff like proprietary drivers and the repos are huge.
Want to try Linux? Here's a link to dl Kubuntu. Here're a couple tips to cover common use cases...
Re: (Score:3)
I know 2 people who were thinking of moving from Windows to Linux but the sheer number of distros with at ton of recommendations for each baffled them as they're not professionals, just regular users. In the end 1 didnt bother and stayed with Redmond and the other bought a Mac. The reality of human psychology is that too much choice is as bad as too little, people just cant be arsed to spend time deciding. If linux wants to make inroads onto the average Joe's desktop it really needs to be narrowed down to maybe 2 or 3 distros.
Ubuntu if you're looking to be a regular user.
Fedora if you're looking work as a sysadmin (RHEL still dominates in paid support which probably correlates well to professional sysadmin jobs).
Any other distro is for hobbyists or experienced users with atypical requirements.
You're never going to kill the other distros (open source) but the default choices have been pretty clear for a few years.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Choice paralysis is mostly marketing bullshit. The UX people latched on to that nonsense and are pushing it aggressively in Western culture. Look at the difference between Japanese and American technology, and tell me that people all across the world suffer from being "overwhelmed" by choices. I for one am fed up with people telling me what I want and don't want.
The real problems are pushing choices when they're all basically the same, and not providing good search tools and filters so it's hard to narro
Re: (Score:2)
"Choice paralysis is mostly marketing bullshit"
Odd, I didn't think Aesop was a marketing exec. Perhaps you should get a clue before posting next time.
Re: (Score:2)
Windows already does everything this new distribution wants to do so no one has to move away from Windows at all. WSL2 already can run Ubuntu, Debian, Suse, Oracle, and even Mint (via LinuxmintWSL2 on GitHub). At least they can try them all out before committing to a full install of their favorite.
But I agree that Linux needs to narrow itself down to a few distributions. So many developers wasting their time on insignificant little distributions when they should team up and make a couple good ones that re
Re: (Score:1)
It's less that the environment needs to be narrowed down to 2-3 distros, and more that users should promote 2-3 general usage distros, instead of picking fights over stupid shit like APT vs. RPM or rolling release vs. point release or KDE vs. Xfce vs. MATE. That's why I usually recommend newbies "Ubuntu, Fedora, or Mint; pick the one you like the best, it isn't a big deal" even if I use none of them (I use Debian).
I'm saying that because a lot of those distros exist for good reasons, but those reasons don't
Re: (Score:2)
There are very few that are recommended especially for newcomers - look below - they boil down to Fedora or Debian - or a close variant that is simpler usually Ubuntu or Mint for Debian
They each went a different way - Windows or Mac ... that's two already - and each has many versions...
Gnome and flatcrap? (Score:5, Insightful)
No, thanks.
And so (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Makes zero sense (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yep. I'm sure Mr. T is more of a FreeBSD type of guy anyway. The Face - OSX, obviously.
If you come to think about it, MacOS' userland is BSD anyway ;-)
Re: (Score:2)
Yep. I'm sure Mr. T is more of a FreeBSD type of guy anyway. The Face - OSX, obviously.
Murdoch seems like a Slackware kind of guy...
Re: (Score:2)
When I first read about this... (Score:2)
... I thought it was a joke or a parody. It is, right?
Re: (Score:1)
blendOS? (Score:4, Interesting)
No Cinnamon, No Way! (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
>"Gnome 3 (and Unity) ruined the Linux desktop's chances for success."
Yes and no. If anything, it sparked the creation of Mint, Cinnamon, and MATE, which has worked out pretty good. And KDE/Plasma also works great as well and has been there all along.
In some ways it has hurt Linux adoption having so many different desktops and distros. But in other ways, having choice is what has kept it from disaster (in the face of exactly things like Gnome3, Unity, etc).
Qubes without Xen? (Score:1)
Comment removed (Score:3)
KDE is so much better (IMHO) (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
>"It confounds me when I see projects like this giving preference to Gnome over KDE."
Me, as well. Gnome is, without doubt, the worst possible default desktop for any Linux distribution. Most people hate it as some alien beast, and it probably has soured many people on "Linux." ANYTHING would be a better default, especially KDE, Cinnamon, MATE, XFCE, or LXDE.
I thought SystemD could do all of this? (Score:2)
Why do we need a seperate OS anyway?