Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

In a classic Linux distro, various OS components are much less tightly coupled than in Windows. You can easily update the linux kernel, without updating all the system libraries, daemons, configs, tools, applications, much less your user configs and data. This is done every time "apt-get upgrade" installs an upgraded kernel package, which can be more often than monthly, depending on linux distro. And all the other components can be updated separately, like openssl libraries, init system binaries, tools like git, etc. You can swap in your own alternative for any component, if you know how. The linux kernel is one of the easiest components to swap because the linux syscall ABI is very backwards compatible. (Linux compatibility challenges are about user-land libraries which are all separate and up to the development policy of those library authors, modulated by the update policy of the distro.)

I find modern Windows and macOS updates to be frustratingly opaque and slow. Linux distro updates, on the popular/common distros like debian and arch, are one of my favorite parts of using the system. It'll just install updates for like 200 separate packages (libraries, tools, etc) bang, bang, bang, less than a minute, done. And with the absurdly high speed of todays CPUs and storage, why should it take longer? What are Windows and macOS even doing? I will accept linux has some drawbacks and disadvantages, but the system package managers have been fantastic, for about 2 decades now.



Same. A long time ago, I envied Windows and Mac users. For the past decade, I mostly just pity them.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: