Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Omarchy Is Not A Distro

abyss.fish

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 186 posts

Re: Omarchy Is Not A Distro

#171

Post by kokada »

TiredOfLife wrote: post #169
Barrin92 wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>My question for people is whether their objection has to do with Omarchy itself or with the person or people behind it both because as I said there's no distinction with a project like this, and I'll give you a technical example for this. The manual which I briefly read through says this on the monitor configuration: "Omarchy assumes you're running on a 2x-capable retina-class display by default[...] It's what you'd…

Monitors with that PPI have a market share of >98% among people this is targeting. The Apple using crowd.

Would like to know where are you getting this information. I don't know a single person that has a >200PPI monitor, and most of them are Mac users and also programmers.

Re: Omarchy Is Not A Distro

#172

Post by cauch »

yuters wrote: post #156
cauch wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did not say "despite having a fix to hyprland, they don't offer a standalone recipe", I'm referring to the whole behavior: how it is presented, how it is hyped, how there is its own conference, its own merchandising, ... When it comes to hyprland, there is this childish attitude of "people do what they want, extract it from the source yourself" when people are legitimately surprised on how the thing was handled. If…

> I did not say "despite having a fix to hyprland, they don't offer a standalone recipe", You said this: > Did dhh provide a recipe to install hyprland properly without having to install a full "distribution"? (I don't know, it's a real question) > It feels very strange (and wrong) to me: if there is difficulties in installing something, try to help people instead of packaging the solution with other things that are…

The number of reactions was pretty small for Hacker News, and the silent majority probably did not react because they did not have a biased reading of my comments and there is therefore nothing to react to.

I don't believe it was difficult to understand, and you are probably not a good person to estimate if it was the case or not (of course if something is misunderstood by 0.1% of the people, these persons who misunderstood it will say "well, it was difficult to understand", it would be more convincing if this judgement was coming from someone who did understand it from the start).

I also think that there is a difference in culture. If you have enough experience to notice that Omarchy is overhyped, then you probably also have some experience thinking of what makes a reliable distributions and so on, and where I was getting at probably seemed simple and obvious. Inversely, if it's not the case, what I'm saying are concepts you did not really think or care about, and therefore it may be new or confusing, even if it is correctly explained.

Re: Omarchy Is Not A Distro

#174

Post by dolmen »

dtj1123 wrote: post #118
voidnap wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True! I love it when I buy a computer pre-installed with windows and it has a bunch of extra software bundled in like norton antivirus, dropbox, and opera. Plus the OEM makes money and I get a bunch of free apps. It's a win win. I hope the author of omarchy gets sponsor money for including nordvpn, spotify, and 1password. I love seeing linux become more conventionally attractive and steer in the direction of windows…

Could you please confirm that this is satire

No, don't.

Re: Omarchy Is Not A Distro

#175

Post by kuschku »

Aurornis wrote: post #71
terracatta wrote: post #57

Usually these types of articles are written about things that challenge status quos. I remember reading a lot about Ruby on Rails in the same vein "ruby isn't a real language", "rails is just a collection of scripts", and "you can't build real web apps with it." If Omarchy is upsetting the Linux establishment as much as this article implies (unclear if this is just a one-off) then it's probably worth a look!

> If Omarchy is upsetting the Linux establishment as much as this article implies It’s not upsetting anyone other than people who like to argue about inconsequential things on social media. I actually don’t think it would be as popular without all of the manufactured drama and controversy around. Some people (like the parent comment) are drawn to the controversy and feeling of rebellion. I bet 99% of people do not ca…

People appreciate clean, good defaults. Nothing unnecessary, everything following a well thought-out pattern.

If you break this clean design out of pragmatism, to ship something that most users would install themselves anyway, most people will be alright with that. There are several distros that ship Google Chrome and Steam, and most people are okay with that or tolerate it, out of pragmatism.

But if you compromise the clean concept of a distro to ship something that people wouldn't usually install, they will get upset.

Whether that's Ubuntu Unity's Amazon integration, the Copilot button, bloatware on a Windows PC or a 2010s cheap Samsung phone, or shortcuts to services that most users wouldn't typically want to use.

The windows 10/11 LinkedIn shortcut caused the same kind of complaints as the grok/x shortcuts in Omarchy, for the same reason.

Re: Omarchy Is Not A Distro

#176

Post by kuschku »

hokumguru wrote: post #13

I’m sorry, but what is the actual definition of a distro? What makes Omarchy different than, say, Cachy which is also an opinionated DE and set of packages on top of Arch. There aren’t really any rules to what to find this or not. Just because something is more opinionated than other solutions doesn’t mean it’s invalid. In fact, I would say that that’s the primary reason people gravitate towards Omarchy. Many develop…

Many distros have meta-packages, which install a specific desktop and some good defaults.

Omarchy could have just been two packages, omarchy-defaults (a package containing the default configs) and omarchy-base (a metapackage depending on all the packages omarchy would want to install by default).

Then you could just use a regular arch setup, and set it to install omarchy-base, and you'd get the same end result, but you could also sidegrade between regular arch and the omarchy configs.

See e.g. https://wiki.debian.org/DebianDesktop/Tasks

Re: Omarchy Is Not A Distro

#177

Post by kuschku »

epistasis wrote: post #19
poly2it wrote: post #11

It is understandable to be frustrated at a project without technical merit gaining so much traction when, as in the author's words, "longstanding distros like Debian have struggled with funding and sponsorship for decades". However, I do feel the author fails to come up with any conclusion as to why there is such a disparity between interest in traditional distributions and this rice. I agree that it is almost suspic…

Its rise is not suspicious to me at all, the author has tremendous reach influence in the developer community, that drives adoption easily. Omarchy was my first entry back into desktop Linux since the early 2000s, when I ran enlightenment. The promises of Omarchy are big, and the idea of somebody trying all the tons of available bits of desktop Linux and assembling their favorites is very compelling! I've since moved…

Search for "global shortcuts" in your start menu. KDE Plasma has a global shortcuts settings page where you can create shortcuts to run any program, command, open any page you like etc.

https://userbase.kde.org/Tutorials/hotkeys

Re: Omarchy Is Not A Distro

#178

Post by mid-kid »

It's a shame that this article focusses on Omarchy being "just some dotfiles" when I feel it's the weakest of the points it makes against Omarchy (there's many valid reasons to have issues with it!).

Omarchy isn't any more "just some dotfiles" (henceforth, "default configurations") than any other derivative distribution seeks to be. Distributions always ship some kind of default configuration, be it embedded in the programs themselves, installed in /etc or otherwise patched in. Of course, some distributions, especially base distributions, focus on just shipping the packages, but more involved ones, for example Ubuntu, tweak the default configurations of many programs to provide a cohesive experience.

I've always found it a shame how difficult it is to reproduce some of the r/unixporn screenshots, to see if they actually function nicely, use for a bit and see what I like and can backport to my own configurations. Even when the author provides some links, it's usually really hard to set up, and you're never quite sure what the author might've glossed over or configured out-of-band. I always wished there were more of these highly opinionated linux respins with heavily tweaked dotfiles, so at some point I also made my own to add to the pile: https://github.com/mid-kid/RocketISO/blob/master/docs/RELEAS...

Re: Omarchy Is Not A Distro

#179

Post by least »

TiredOfLife wrote: post #168
anon7000 wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CachyOS (an Arch distro) has done something kid of like this, where it bundles eg a default setup for hyprland and several other desktop environments. It’s not perfect, but I like their model a lot. I mean it’s very Arch to be able to choose whatever you want, but nice to have some opinionated defaults.

CachyOS is not a distro. It's just an opinionated Arch spin

What makes one a distro and one a spin, flavor, or other made up branding by one of the larger linux vendors?

It's arbitrary. They're all linux distributions delivering distinct OS experiences. The only reason we call one a 'flavor' or 'spin' is because Red Hat and Ubuntu wanted to maintain a core identity with its product line.

Re: Omarchy Is Not A Distro

#180

Post by least »

kokada wrote: post #171
TiredOfLife wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Monitors with that PPI have a market share of >98% among people this is targeting. The Apple using crowd.

Would like to know where are you getting this information. I don't know a single person that has a >200PPI monitor, and most of them are Mac users and also programmers.

If they have a mac laptop or iMac they have a >200 PPI monitor. If you have a higher end PC laptop, a lot of them go well past that.

If you're only talking about desktop displays, then I 100% agree that almost no one has them because until very recently, hardly any have existed because the only people who cared about it are people using MacOS. But given the increased number of 5k monitors with high refresh and gaming features shown off at CES and expected to hit the market this year, on top of a smattering of productivity-oriented displays with high PPI coming out in the past year, this could likely change.

I'd say it's something that benefits Windows and Linux because fractional scaling still isn't perfect on either OS. But Windows, frankly, does scaling for desktop in a much more pragmatic and (for most people) better way than MacOS, so having to set your 4k 27 inch monitor to 150% scaling isn't a big deal. Things still look relatively sharp. On MacOS, not so much.

Post reply on HN