[HN Gopher] Ask HN: An OS for people who hate changes?
___________________________________________________________________
Ask HN: An OS for people who hate changes?
I really don't like any changes to my OS (and software) once set
up, unless I choose to install some change. I understand the need
for security updates but I wish they were not bundled with
features, i.e. how Windows 10 updates everything compared to
Windows 7 specific update selection. So, I migrated from Windows 7
to Ubuntu, but now Ubuntu is down the same path where everything
changes and breaks by itself all the time. Where should I migrate
next? How is Mac with updates; is security tradeoff better when
staying on old major versions? What flavor of Linux is most like
Ubuntu before snaps?
Author : thrwwy_grump
Score : 29 points
Date : 2023-04-23 19:06 UTC (3 hours ago)
| dmbche wrote:
| I've been very happy with Manjaro. It's a just-works version of
| Arch linux. When downloading, take the less cutring edge option,
| and you should be fine.
|
| I have not had anything break in the last year and a half, and
| the AUR is a nice plus.
| squarefoot wrote:
| > I've been very happy with Manjaro.
|
| I second that. Although I'm still a Debian guy on my main
| machine, and use Alpine on smaller ones, I chose Manjaro on my
| laptops, also installing it on less technical people machines
| with great results, no problems or complaints, just the
| occasional need to explain the few differences to new users
| coming from Windows, but that wouldn't be the OP's case.
| ipcress_file wrote:
| Another Debian stable user. I've been using LXDE for years.
| Nothing changes. I like it that way.
|
| LXQT or XFCE would be my next choices.
| haunter wrote:
| Windows 10 LTSC is that too. Everything is removed, including the
| MS Store, only Edge remains so it's pretty much a vanilla Windows
| 10 version. Feature updates released every ~2 years or so (for
| example it was 2015, 2016, 2018, 2021 so far).
|
| I use it for all my Windows PCs, even for gaming.
| markus_zhang wrote:
| As individual how does one get a copy? Last time I checked it's
| for company only.
| haunter wrote:
| Archive.org for example (and you can activate it too without
| a problem)
|
| https://archive.org/details/en-
| us_windows_10_enterprise_ltsc...
| WallyFunk wrote:
| Try Vanilla OS:
|
| https://vanillaos.org/
|
| > Vanilla OS is an immutable and atomic Ubuntu-based distribution
| that receives updates at the right time without sacrificing
| security or functionality.
|
| > Vanilla OS is an immutable operating system. Core parts of the
| system are locked down to prevent unwanted changes or corruption
| caused by third-party applications or faulty updates. Some paths
| such as the home and configuration directories are still
| writable, allowing the user to keep and modify their files and
| application data.
|
| > Core components are updated via controlled and atomic
| transactions, which are only applied when successful and made
| available on reboot.
|
| Anecdotally I've been running Ubuntu 18 since it came out and
| updates don't mess with my system. They're not designed to mess
| with your system. They're mostly security patches for modular
| pieces of the OS.
| paulryanrogers wrote:
| Ubuntu 18.04 will reach EOL in May.
| toast0 wrote:
| Mac OS _will_ move stuff and restyle stuff for no reason. It 's
| not the answer for you. The ecosystem tends to move quickly and
| it becomes hard to get software unless you're running an Apple
| release less than 18 months old but also at least 2 months old.
|
| Maybe try FreeBSD with Mate or a less intense wm like fvwm?
|
| FreeBSD does make changes over time, but most of them aren't
| without good reason. FreeBSD does have three firewalls, but it's
| the same three firewalls its had for decades. Most of the time,
| new functionality will be added to existing appropriate tools
| rather than through tool replacement. Netstat was changed to run
| faster, rather than replaced with a faster, but different tool.
| Ifconfig configures network interfaces, including wifi (although
| if wifi is important to you, tread carefully). Open Sound System
| was fixed rather than replaced. Etc, etc.
|
| The separation of base and ports/pkg means updates to ports are
| really up to the upstream developer --- some do value stability
| and some don't, but at least the base is pretty good.
| blizarre wrote:
| My setup: a laptop with Arch Linux that I set up 3 years ago. I
| didn't touch the daemons/services, so it's all the basic stuff
| auto-maintained and auto-upgraded by arch linux. It just works (I
| only installed the services I needed).
|
| But for the user facing parts, I am using my own forks of the
| suckless tools: dwm (Windows manager), st (terminal), slock
| (screen locking) It took me a little while to set it up to my
| liking, but I haven't had to change anything to my workflow, it
| just works. It's very barebone, but with vscode and a browser, I
| have all I need.
|
| And I only need to run pacman -Suy once in a while.
| cjbprime wrote:
| Ubuntu 22.04 LTS will receive security updates until April 2027.
|
| (So, if you're upgrading to new Ubuntu releases every six months,
| it sounds like that you're not following the upgrade strategy
| that would be suggested by your requirements.)
| johnea wrote:
| I don't think any version of ubuntu meets the criteria.
|
| Ubuntu has a really persistent update mechaism built in.
|
| Arch derived distos would be good, updates are only when you
| manually run them...
|
| I use arch + fluxbox and I've been able to move my
| configuration from computer to computer by simply copying my
| home directory. When the new computer boots, I have the exact
| same desktop environment that I prefer. It only changes when I
| change it.
| cjbprime wrote:
| > Ubuntu has a really persistent update mechaism built in.
|
| The OP doesn't object to updates, but to unexpected breaking
| changes, where th change is caused by different design
| decisions rather than bugs. LTS releases should not have
| those.
| [deleted]
| i_hate_pigeons wrote:
| maybe try nixos? assuming you are happy to handle the conf
| management
| zenogantner wrote:
| Maybe try Debian stable?
|
| Ubuntu is based on Debian, and the releases receive mostly
| security updates ... so this might be really something for you.
|
| Also, no snaps as far as I know.
| doubled112 wrote:
| Debian Stable + XFCE would probably be my go to.
|
| I've heard XFCE described as "the Debian of DEs" and I think
| it's pretty accurate. Slow careful changes over years, but the
| good things stay.
|
| I'm not sure how Debian's LTS support works. Stable becomes
| old-stable in 2 years. It's supported for a while longer. If it
| is Debian and XFCE though, it's likely that the end user hardly
| notices the upgrade.
|
| I suppose RHEL based distros have a 10 year support term, and
| could be a good choice too.
| lockhouse wrote:
| This! If you truly do not want your OS to change other than
| bug and security fixes for 10 years it's hard to beat a RHEL
| based distro. If you don't mind making an account for it, you
| can even run RHEL itself for free for personal use.
|
| https://developers.redhat.com/products/rhel/overview
| doubled112 wrote:
| You have to renew the RHEL developer license yearly.
|
| I'm way too lazy for that, so I tend to recommend the other
| options. The account is 100% worth access to their
| documentation though.
|
| Also, RHEL changes. They have even rebased to a new GNOME
| release on a point release before.
| morkalork wrote:
| LTS versions are the way to go.
| dadoum wrote:
| I think Ubuntu MATE is maybe the right choice here, since it's
| kinda its purpose.
| Aaron2222 wrote:
| To answer your question about macOS, major version updates are
| yearly, things don't change much within the same major version,
| and you're never forced to update by the OS. However, major
| versions only get 2 years of limited security updates after the
| next major version comes out, and major versions do tend to
| change things (i.e. the major redesign in Big Sur, or the new
| System Settings in Ventura). So probably not what you're looking
| for.
| snovymgodym wrote:
| Tangentially, I really lament the current state of desktop OS's.
|
| In a perfect world, you should be able to buy an operating system
| that's basically Windows 7, with all the security and kernel
| updates which have been applied to 10/11, and none of the ads,
| telemetry, and smartphone-esque UI that modern Windows tries to
| force on you.
| ArcMex wrote:
| It sounds like you would find benefit from Linux Mint[0]. I
| recommend using it for a few days and seeing if it fits your
| workflow.
|
| 0 https://linuxmint.com/
| jdworrells wrote:
| Seconded. I've used Mint on and off for over a decade now. It's
| stable and changes release to release are subtle. It's boring
| and that's why I keep coming back to it.
| brainchild-adam wrote:
| I concur. Used to be an Ubuntu user, and for me Mint fixed
| quite a few of the problems I started having with Ubuntu (e.g.
| snaps). Plus, I find their defaults quite usable. If you like
| choice, give it a go using a live system.
| ofalkaed wrote:
| I have been using slackware with ion/notion WM for about two
| decades now and little has changed which is why I stick with it,
| I have no interest in having to relearn my system every update.
| In all these years I have only encountered one system change that
| caused me any grief, when they finally gave into PulseAudio I had
| some headaches but it was only an issue for me because I use my
| computer for music/recording and not really that big of an issue
| since Pulse had been out a good many years by that point and the
| solutions were easy to find.
| polotics wrote:
| Linux with xfce is, I think, the answer you're looking for. I
| guess Fedora on Qubes.
| jmclnx wrote:
| I would suggest Slackware, but may be a bit of work for you.
|
| But if I understand you, OpenBSD may be the one. upgrades are
| simple, install is simple (unless you _need_ GUIs) and patches
| are simple. I never had a patch break anything.
|
| To upgrade non-base (installed) software just do a "pkg_add -u"
| once in a while. You decide when to do that. Plus docs are never
| out of date.
|
| If you go with OpenBSD you should subscribe to mail list
| "announce@openbsd.org"
|
| But you may or may not have hardware for it, if you have Nvidia
| Graphics, you really cannot use OpenBSD.
|
| good luck
| loxias wrote:
| I've been using the same debian stable setup, mostly unchanged,
| for almost 20 years.
|
| The most recent "new bullshit" I had to learn was figuring out
| EFI/GPT enough to boot onto a new thinkpad. If you prioritize
| stability and reliability over features, debian stable might be
| right for you as well. :) I'd avoid any whiz bang GUI layers. I
| have a simple window manager which runs xterms, which can then
| run firefox and emacs.
|
| The next time I imagine being forced to make a change is to move
| to Wayland, but that's years away.
| theyknowitsxmas wrote:
| Which release? I get you'd only update sources over time?
| wolfgang42 wrote:
| It's not necessarily what I would choose, but my mom had the same
| problem and after a lot of research decided on OpenBSD, plus
| classic X utilities (xv, xpdf, gvim, xterm, etc). It's something
| of a learning curve, but they all change _very_ slowly and are
| big on backwards compatibility, so once you figure out how things
| work and get them set up for your needs it'll probably keep
| working that way for a long time to come.
| costco wrote:
| Debian Stable with just a window manager (like cwm), xbindkeys,
| and maybe a shortcut to a program like rofi to open a run menu
| for programs not used frequently enough to justify a shortcut.
| You memorize all the keyboard shortcuts once and they will never
| change on you.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-04-23 23:02 UTC)