I’m seeing hints Fedora is moving towards prioritizing those things, and I’ve been actively avoiding them because I find their concepts not necessary.
I have my thoughts on the topics below, and I welcome all clarifications (a lot are assumptions)!
Flatpaks feel like a bulky, entire system (like systemd), filled with unofficial developers (packages still need vetting and thus security concerns), and a larger “solution” than the old-school way of just finding libraries and symlinking them for the rare programs that need that, or running it through Wine
I don’t want to be vetting packages. I don’t want to be having another repo on my computer if I can help it (I already have issue with RPM Fusion). And really the only time I needed a Flatpak was to play Hexen with Doomsday Engine on Fedora 39, and it didn’t even work (didn’t debug it; but it’s in openSUSE’s default repos and works).
I like running stuff as-close to bare-metal as possible. I have problem with the concept of Wayland (like doing libinput → evdev instead of just evdev on Xorg). I have problem with Flatpaks pulling in an entire Mesa library based on some old version the unofficial dev last tested a year ago; yeah it’s cool that it’ll run still, but that’s an incredibly sub-optimal way to go about it.
I also like the best possible performance real-world and in-concept, so any extra layers that are there for compatibility are a no-go for the most part (I tolerated libinput fine until I found I could still force evdev on GNOME 46 on Xorg )
I do servers bare-metal and believe security comes from the OS, good sysadmin practices, and traditional physical protection and backup/recovery.
Atomic and immutable distros I feel imply the main distro lacks QA to deliver safe updates, or that the distro can break just by moving the cursor in a specific gesture (unstable).
I’ve done servers with openSUSE Tumbleweed and Fedora Server with unattended daily updates for close to 10 years and never had a broken update or a failed reboot, and generally know not to be doing silly things to be causing boot to fail on servers (like deleting /boot because ). I do daily backups too, so if a HDD failed, whatever I manually rebuild and have it back up within an hour or two. So I don’t quite get immutable on servers.
On workstations/PCs, I feel it’s a hindrance to power-users and only for protecting newbies from… deleting /boot because it’ll make GRUB faster. I don’t like this protection as I feel it only continues a growing cycle of not exposing users to how to diagnose traditional issues. I know there’s better wording for that and I’ll come back to it
If the distro has good QA, updates aren’t breaking a system. If the distro has good leadership, it’ll provide access to good repos for proprietary or specialized drivers (NVIDIA, ROCm, bleeding-edge Mesa, etc), and these repos won’t be pushing stuff that will break a system. I know Ubuntu is fine. RPM Fusion and that mesa-freeworld ordeal dropped my confidence in Fedora since they also use RPM Fusion for NV drivers (but iirc it was just a NV driver repo so I might be ok with that by itself). Fedora on the Intel UHD 630 I have works fine without anything from RPM Fusion, and the last AMD GPU I had also had a good Ryzen CPU to handle any video I wanted, so I’m fine with Fedora on open-source graphics for now.
I run things on servers on the host OS as-is, and that host OS is running on bare-metal (but I’ll tolerate VMs on VPS). The idea I get of Containers is that it’s another Flatpak, but for server stuff, and running that stuff inside their own (containers) VM.
I use Fedora Server and openSUSE TW and the stuff I run runs with the latest tech. Generally speaking my stuff is mainly a webserver with LEMP, but I was doing this with game servers a while back too and latest GCC. The stuff I run runs with the latest tech, which the distros provides in fast-order; I didn’t need to have a specific outdated version of anything or to lock versions.
If I needed specific older versions of things (like nginx to run a certain extension), then I can maybe understand containers on servers. And if I had to run one thing in a container, I’d try for everything at that point just for consistency. I guess that would be the point of CoreOS?
Most of my view is only as an end-user with a homelab. I like the current Workstation edition being GNOME, it still having an Xorg session, and it not being Atomic.
I can see the appeal of large-scale enterprise needing centralized, consistent software across fleets of computers. And for those ordeals, Fedora is where I’d look first for Atomic distros and CoreOS.
And Flatpak? I can run a repo just for the organization, and it’s convenient it’s already baked into Fedora!
And I suppose containers have to be good enough if Fedora has a whole OS with it in-mind, so if I’m already streamlining everything, containers sound like a plan too!