This is why it was such a revolution when Ubuntu came out and quickly dominated the Linux desktop space. When it was new.

It took Debian and made it something approachable. But even then it was a 1/3rd of what is described as needed in the article.

An A/B partition scheme is very simple and the system as a whole is integration tested in CI. An OSTree based atomic system is pretty close, although there is some added complexity.

Not to mention Debian out-of-the-box is a pretty miserable experience for everyday users. Their Nvidia drivers won't work, they can't figure out how to install Chrome, videos won't play due to missing codecs, etc.

ChromeOS is dead simple. So much so that my otherwise computer-illiterate wife can (and does) use it regularly. There's no way that I'd get her to use debian, though, unless I set everything up for her in advance. Choosing the desktop, setting up PPAs / flatpack / whatever (if you don't want the stock firefox browser), tweaking power settings, there's all sorts of faffing about in comparison.

I'd have to set up syncing in Firefox for her (or whatever browser) but to be fair, I helped her set up her account in the chromebook too.

edit: i'll add, link your image to a github repo with a readme describing how to get it on disk. there's the project.

The Chrome OS is running trusted boot and immutable partition, and completely closed host system, with no user-installable apt [0]. This means it's impossible to completely break the system - nothing that user does will escape browser sandbox. And, for defense-in-depth, even if browser sandbox got compromised, there is no sudo nor ~/.bashrc nor any other executable per-user configs, so malicious software will disappear after reboot. And if you compromise kernel and modify disk directly, there is verified boot...

And this is not just theoretical benefits, it's stops practical attacks. Are you sure that "bash | curl" command you typed was safe? Are you sure that "pip install" or "npm install" you did didn't actually install malware on your PC?

It is possible to build systems like this based on open-source Linux, but this will be quite a lot of work, and may even require separated trusted builder machine. Definitely out of reach of non-technical user.

[0] https://www.chromium.org/chromium-os/chromiumos-design-docs/...

That is why the netbook boom died. Because while they promised to make cheap Linux devices that anybody could use none of them actually delivered on it.

In fact the whole thing was a fiasco.

The classic Linux problem can be described as "9 clicks to shit". Meaning that a Linux desktop looks, on the initial viewing, as something that is actually usable and modern, but once you start clicking around things start going bad. Going bad quickly.

A major problem cause of the problem is "linux is about choice" mentality.

Another problem is that programmers specialize at being good at programming, but things like documentation and UI testing are their own disciplines that are separate and distinct in a lot of meaningful ways. So, in attempt to make up for this, they leave configuration and details up to user choice. It is effectively pawning off the last stages of development onto the end user, who are generally most ill-equipped to make technical decisions on software they are not familiar with.

Instead of presenting something that "just works" users are presented with a myriad of choices and options that they have to make decisions about before ever actually being able to use the software.

Having lots of choices in applications, widget libraries, desktops, ways to install software, init systems, etc etc... results in very significant complexity as it all has to work together.

And complexity breeds bugs.

So each and every user experience ends up being its own unique things. There is no "standard configuration" no "supported configuration" and no "documented configuration".

The end result is that each user is forced to find ways to make the desktop work for their specific use case. Essentially finding a magic combination of things that isn't broken for what they specifically want. The desktop will still be full of buggy behavior, but just not in the way that that particular user cares about.

This creates a extraordinary of frustration and friction when time comes to doing the things that the desktop is actually intended for... which is getting actual work done.

This isn't a problem for a certain class of highly technical users that love technical minutia and configuring things. Knowing how to carve a working system out of a OS riddled with historical artifacts and highly technical choices is a badge of honor for many people.

But this isn't how most people want to do things.

Netbook boom tried to fix this in certain ways, but all that ended up happening is that each little corporation tried to do their own thing and then abandoned it when they realized there was no money to be made and they really lacked the resources and expertise to make it work.

I get the sentiment, but honestly anytime I try to use a modern smartphone it almost takes a short flight. Hidden UI gestures, active sides, functionality limited to 'popular' cases, etc. Totally unusable and frustrating, IMHO.

I really with Mozilla would get in this game. For most apps for most people, hosted PWAs make the most sense. But right now we're either stuck with local native software or only web apps from closed providers.

ChromeOS is a product designed to suck people further in to the Google ecosystem. All its limitations, like basically being a web browser with access to the Android Play store, are built around that. The simplicity of not having to worry about anything else is how Google sells that as a benefit of their platform to the masses.

I don't know any of my fellow nerds who want a ChromeOS kind of experience, so why would any of us dedicate our free time to making one?

https://yjs.dev/ seems like a useful building block.

I've had - and continue to have, a ton of minor and a few large problems.

First, wifi. Apparently there's often problems with Intel killer 6e laptop cards, which required me to enter loads of console commands that I didn't understand to fix. I did finally fix it, but I'm not sure exactly what did it. A couple of hours work over a few days to fix this.

I work from an external monitor plugged into my laptops HDMI port with the lid closed, and it seems Ubuntu is massively confused by this. I'm constantly having to open the laptop to get a login screen to show, then logging in and closing it, then opening it again because now the desktop doesn't show.

My laptop screen resets to minimum brightness every restart.

I did a driver update and suddenly my external monitor wasn't recognized at all so I had to roll back.

And at least several hours more on other issues. Oh yes, if I suspend then try to wake, I get a black screen or occasionally the Ubuntu startup screen but can never get back to the login screen until I do a hard reset.

The Bluetooth audio was set to headset quality (mono) and the only way to fix this, following 20 minutes research, was to install a different audio settings app.

All of these things, I can fix. I don't want to, but as a technically savvy user I can do it, with enough hours put in. But there's no way I'd suggest anyone else in my family or friends to use it unless they clearly tell me that they would enjoy tinkering with their operating system.

I can and do all the time: KDE Plasma + Debian Testing

I think mint+cinnamon is fantastic, my only gripe is that packages get old after a release has been out a year or two.

edit: specifics please.

Two things here.

One, OSs get adopted because of the package they arrive in. Laptops have Windows bundled, schools get computers with Windows on the cheap. Phones come with whatever they are integrated - often, not even a major upgrade is possible on them, let alone an alternative OS.

In my opinion, products like the Steam Deck are what get Linux adopted. They provide excellent functionality out of the box.

Two, PCs in this age thrive on interaction. Overwhelmingly, they are bought to interact with other PCs, either directly by network or through formats of specific software, like docx. Therefore, the functionality depends on how well they can participate in a network. This is where Microsoft really made it big with how ruthlessly they pushed Windows as an app platform and Office as the productivity software baseline.

Hence, in the end, what makes Linux really competitive today is the proliferation of web apps, because Linux has first class browsers, and the existence of Wine and its related software. Take these two away and the OS is not even talked about as an alternative to anything, just a specialty, or a curiosity.

Really, an alternative OS can do two things. It can either set the trend, which is not very likely, given that we are talking about alternatives. Or it can follow the trend, or "embrace" it, in MS lingo.

All the office were based on open source systems. DT wanted to make money mostly on their data plans + device management services. The project failed for one reason: Enterprise IT is the opposite of price sensitive. I had talks with a couple of CIOs who were interested in the idea, but realized that commiting to a solution that could slash their budgets by 80% would be career suicide.

Programmers often stop worrying about the details once they're satisfied, though, and there are a lot of details. Yes we could add thumbnails to the file picker, but we also need to support Nvidia hardware and the archive application is missing a few much more interesting compression formats, plus there are a bazillion logged bugs that actually crash software rather than being a minor inconvenience.

In theory someone could set up a collective of programmers, designers, and translators to create a usable Linux desktop for the Windows 10 refugees, but it'll require a lot of effort from a lot of volunteers and a lot of people who happen to share the same principles and preferences.

ChromeOS works because there's a single entity that can hire a small group of designers to tell an army of programmers what they want everything to look and work like.

There are actually projects and companies that fork ChromeOS, but they're pretty small and once Google stops maintaining the OS they're going to collapse pretty quickly.

Companies should be happy that there’s a FOSS community that lets them build up on top of it for free. It is a great deal! I wonder why there isn’t an EpicOS yet.