KDE launches its own distribution

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

What KDE Linux Is Aiming For

  • Immutable desktop OS using Arch Linux packages only for the base system; no pacman, users install apps mainly via Flatpak.
  • Positioned as a “reference implementation” and OEM‑friendly image: lessons learned from KDE Neon’s Ubuntu base and from SteamOS/other Plasma‑based systems.
  • Goals mentioned: safer, rollback‑friendly updates; better out‑of‑box setup; consistent user experience for hardware partners and end users.

Distribution vs Desktop Environment

  • Several comments explain that for users most visible differences between distros are the desktop environment (KDE vs GNOME etc.), while “under the hood” differences are in package formats, cadence, tooling, and stability philosophy.
  • From that view, “KDE Linux” is more about shipping KDE’s preferred UX stack than inventing a new user experience from scratch.

Immutable Design, Flatpak, and System Apps

  • Base OS is read‑only (mainly /usr), more like ChromeOS, Fedora Atomic desktops, or macOS+iOS models: atomic image upgrades, easy rollback, user apps layered on top.
  • Supporters like this for non‑technical users (parents, offices, kiosks) and for developers who want a safe base and clear separation between system and user layers.
  • KDE ships core system tools (Dolphin, Konsole, Ark, Spectacle, System Settings, etc.) in the base image because Flatpak is seen as “poor” for tightly integrated system apps.
  • Criticism: users are then forced to use Flatpak for everything else, which some describe as heavy, messy (multiple runtimes, large disk usage), or still immature; others counter that Flatpak is actively maintained, good for sandboxing, and fine when used correctly.

Wayland‑Only Decision and X11 Debate

  • KDE Linux is Wayland‑only; there is no X11 session.
  • Some report Plasma 6 on Wayland as fully stable for years, including fractional scaling and mixed‑refresh setups; others still hit serious workflow regressions (input methods, screen sharing, NVIDIA acceleration, backlight issues).
  • Accessibility is a major concern: commenters argue no Wayland compositor yet matches X11’s existing screen‑reader ecosystem, and GNOME’s Wayland accessibility protocols are not widely adopted.
  • Long, heated X11 vs Wayland discussion: X11 praised for maturity, resilience, remote access (x11vnc), and simple workflows; Wayland defended for modern display features (HDR, mixed DPI, VRR), security model, and ongoing developer attention.

Arch, Rolling Releases, and Stability

  • KDE Linux uses Arch packages but explicitly distances itself from being an “Arch‑based distro”; some see it as closer in spirit to BSD‑style “base system + ports”.
  • Mixed views on Arch: some long‑time users report years of stability with rare breakage; others criticize Arch’s “read the news or get broken” model and prefer SUSE Tumbleweed, Gentoo, or Debian/Fedora for more managed rolling or conservative updates.

Do We Need Another Distro?

  • Skeptics argue KDE should focus on Plasma and polish on existing distros (Fedora KDE, Debian, Kubuntu, Kinoite, Aurora, Bazzite), rather than split resources.
  • Supporters note GNOME also has GNOME OS; having a KDE‑controlled immutable distro is seen as useful for dogfooding, coordinated UX, OEM deals, and pushing new OS‑level ideas (image‑based updates, sandboxed apps, improved input/backups).
  • Overall sentiment is split between enthusiasm for an opinionated KDE‑first immutable desktop and fatigue with yet another distro and Flatpak‑centric workflow.