Because some of us want that minimalism and a good “power user” default setup to tweak from there. I spent all of the 90s learning Linux deeply and custom tweaking everything and trying everything posted to freshmeat.net. I bootstrapped my own Linux from scratch before LFS was a thing.

Now I just want to get work down on an OS that feels like it belongs to power users and closely matches my deployment targets.

This is why I switched to Omarchy.

▲

AstroBen 3 days ago | parent [-]

In that case it for sure makes sense, but for the user like the writer who is new to linux?

I'm very happy I went through the pain of setting everything up from scratch. It taught me how it all works. I just don't see how I'd get that same knowledge ever with Omarchy

▲

runjake 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

It's just my experience, but it seems like nearly all younger people (<= 20s) don't want to deep dive on stuff like Linux or TCP/IP, they want to know enough to be effective (dangerous?) and move onto chasing basic competency in the next technology.

I can from a time when sysadmins were expected to know C and kernel and TCP/IP internals, but that world is no more. Blame it on education, blame it on the pace of technology, I don't know.

I'm not sure how I feel about that, especially thinking about when all the people who know and can build low-level stuff retire and die off. Maybe AI will save them. Who knows?

▲

TiredOfLife 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Not everyone wants that deep of a knowledge.

Not everyone has a spare machine to tinker with.

With Omarchy you get a working good looking OS with thought out defaults and built in themes. It's ready to use, but can be customized.

	▲	runjake 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		Yep, these were my points, too. To think, back in the 70s/80s before Minix and Linux, many of us had to do illegal things to even get access to computers running UNIX. The entry barrier was high and risky, and so was the desire to learn.