• 6 Posts
  • 28 Comments
Joined 2 months ago
cake
Cake day: April 21st, 2025

help-circle







  • JetBrains IDEs

    I have used them in the past. They’re definitely pretty cool and do their job well. Unfortunately, unless I’m wrong, most of their offerings[1] are not open source. I believe this also applies to Fleet.

    My apologies for not making it clear in the post, but I do prefer open source whenever I can afford it.

    Finally, there’s a lot not to like about electron, but I feel like JetBrains’ use of JVMs isn’t a lot better.

    Regardless, I will note it down as I intend to test them all out anyways :P .

    Please feel free to correct me if I’m wrong in any of the above. Thank you!


    1. Don’t quote me on this, but I believe their open source options are limited to the community editions of IntelliJ IDEA and PyCharm. Which isn’t too bad as both of them should support a plethora of languages (including Markdown). ↩︎











  • And if GNOME is considered “not very customisable” in the linux world, KDE, Cinnamon, etc. must be even more customisable

    It’s more like GNOME doesn’t come with a lot of customization options OOTB. You need extra tools -be it Tweaks, Extension Manager or the somewhat archaic Dconf Editor- to unleash the plethora of customization options in a palpable manner.

    On the upside, GNOME’s extensions do allow for extensive customization with ‘ease’. Heck, this often goes beyond what other DEs are capable of (see e.g. PaperWM[1] or Material Shell[2]).


    1. Which has inspired a full-blown WM in Niri. ↩︎

    2. For which Nicco, a KDE developer that also makes content on YouTube, said that its customization (likely) goes beyond what was possible on KDE Plasma at the time. ↩︎



  • I was under the impression Arch was more for “hardcore” users, is that an outdated mindset (or was it ever true)?

    It’s more nuanced than that.

    Arch Linux, the distro Garuda Linux is derived from, is definitely not a distro that holds your hand like e.g. Linux Mint does. It (somewhat) demands you to read extensively through its excellent[1] ArchWiki.

    However, Garuda and other derivatives[2] are opinionated takes on Arch that try to fulfill a specific goal that its respective maintainers have in mind. This can range from using Arch Linux as a base for delivering:

    • a scrutinizingly optimized distro that at (the very) least inches out every other distro in performance (i.e. CachyOS)
    • a distro that functions as a glorified installer[3] for Arch. But with that, remains very close in spirit to what Arch is all about (i.e. EndeavourOS)
    • a ready-to-go gaming distro (i.e. Garuda Linux)
    • (and everything in between and beyond…)

    (Note that the oversimplified descriptions found above don’t quite do justice to the enormous effort that is put into these projects. Furthermore, it has to be mentioned that each of these distros proud themselves on the amazing communities they’ve built.)

    Finally, it goes without saying that having an Arch base continues to pose a (potential) maintenance burden[4] with the constant stream of updates. While some of the above distros include some of the available protections by default, none claim to provide a silver bullet[5]. Thankfully, problems ‘should’ only act up every once in a while. And (almost surely) deflecting them with a working snapshot provides an evergreen magical experience.

    So, to conclude, Arch Linux as a distro definitely is more demanding than e.g. Linux Mint. However, the derivatives mentioned above definitely bridge the gap to a remarkable extent. So much so, perhaps, that you might not even notice much of a difference (besides the constant stream of updates).


    1. Arch Linux is not unique in its extensive documentation. This is more of a trend we find on other distros that come with (almost) no defaults; e.g. Gentoo also sports a(n arguably even more) comprehensive Wiki. This makes total sense as these systems require from their users to set it up. Which, unsurprisingly, is a nonstarter without proper guidance. ↩︎

    2. This includes but is not limited to the likes of CachyOS and EndeavourOS. A more exhaustive list is found here. ↩︎

    3. Historically speaking, the hardest part about Arch Linux was its installation. This has since been mostly alleviated with the introduction of archinstall. ↩︎

    4. I think the Upgrading the system section of its System maintenance wiki entry is one of the most striking examples of what I mean. I’m simply unaware of any other distro that requires/demands something similar. Note that -on Arch- you’re encouraged to update daily or at least weekly. ↩︎

    5. In Arch Linux’ defense, this is a hard problem to solve without introducing radical changes. Even openSUSE that pioneered the BTRFS + Snapper workflow in its Tumbleweed, is actively seeking and working on an even more powerful solution. But let’s not get down that rabbit hole for now 😜. ↩︎