Ngl, I’ve never had issues with either for ram. my experience with Firefox is mostly the sameas chrome with ram usage. The main reason Im on Firefox is cause it’s been a whole lot more stable for me than chrome.
If the majority of ram isn’t being utilized you either have a problem or have entirely to much ram. I’m not saying programs can’t be memory hogs, but they should utilize what resources are there to perform better. It would be like turning on a flash light, using all of the power and then covering half the bulb while trying to cross a field in the dark. The CPU and GPU use more electricity when running at higher percentages, ram is negligible for the most part.
i always hear this but it’s obviously not true lol, if i ever see my ram reach max usage the computer shits itself and i’ll likely have to restart it because most things become utterly frozen
full RAM utilization is patently not something you want.
In my personal experience chrome rarely gives up ram and will starve programs that need it more. While that works if you’re only running chrome, if you’re using it in the background while doing something else then you can find important programs running out of memory. The result is that you have to close and reopen chrome.
Granted, I haven’t used chrome or a chromium-based browser in a very long time, so chrome might have gotten better at giving up memory when other programs need it. However, if I’m playing a game, doing rendering, working in a game engine, etc, then usually I have a browser open in the background with YouTube or Twitch and/or programming/visual references. I don’t need or want a browser consuming as much memory as it can, just enough for it to play videos, show me reference images or tell me how to program something. It absolutely doesn’t need +8gb of ram to do that (I saw it hit 16gb once, which was when I switched to Firefox; 16gb is ridiculous no matter how many tabs you have open).
I switched from Chrome to Firefox on my Mac desktop and the memory usage was cut in half at least. I only use it on my Linux notebook, so I have no idea about the memory usage difference there, but there was an unquestionable difference on the Mac. It has 16 gb of ram and is from 7 years ago, so it was before the M-chips and their ram hunger and still gave me memory warnings.
Now I never have memory issues on it. All it took was switching to Firefox.
So it definitely makes a difference on some systems.
Everytime I see these dumb wojacks I definitely think the meme creator is 12 and have to back away from completely pre judging the whole meme. Thank you for this.
My familie’s smart TV has a thing called “Web App Tester”, which let’s you navigate the web interface as if it was an actual application, which works really well
There is no such thing as a “package”. It is a repository of binary data with references to data in it (ala git). The whole repo and all data is gpg signed.
It seems to be geared toward people who want to constantly maintain there system. I’m surprised at the number of people who like to tinker and often break the OS they daily drive. I use Linux because it protects my freedom and is low maintenance.
One of the simplest ways to safeguard against breakage is to have your /home on a separate partition. I realised I wouldn't need to backup and reformat it from the beginning, I just need to wipe the root drive and reinstall again.
It's made even easier by writing an installation script. Simply put, you can pipe a list of packages into packstrap and use a little convenience package for pulling a partition scheme out of a file.
I like to tinker and I'm aware that things will break so I have these tools that let me rebuild the system again in as short a time as possible.
You dont even need a separate partition, just delete the non-home directories and reinstall. pacstrap might even do that for you 🤔 it has been a while since i last needed to reinstall. And most of the time you dont even need a full reinstall, Arch is trivial to fix most things from a live cd by partially following the install process - most often get a chroot and start reinstalling select packages/configs in some of the worst case scenarios.
yes, i think we can all agree at least on the last point: that developing forward as a community, any Linux is better than corporate OSs. not because they’re evil products of capitalist agenda (even though that’s the case), but because developing them allows you to have a choice, and also incentivizes large companies to meet these security and freedom standards.
It seems to be geared toward people who want to constantly maintain there system
That is where your assumptions are wrong. It is for people that know how and want control over their setup. But after the initial setup maintenance is no worst that any other distro - simpler even in the longer term. Just update your packages and very occasionally manually update a config somewhere or run an extra command before hand (I honestly cannot remember the last time I even needed to do that much…). Far easier than needing to reinstall or fix a whole bunch of broken things after a major system upgrade that happens every few years on other distros.
People that like to tinker and break their system can do that on any distro. That does not mean it is high maintenance, quite the opposite in fact as it is easier to fix as Arch is generally easier to fix when you do break something (so does attract people that do like to tinker). But leave it alone and it wont just randomly break every week like so many people seem to think it does.
I’m surprised at the number of people who like to tinker and often break the OS they daily drive.
People who don’t use Arch or a derivative (or have tried once but didn’t stay long enough to get comfortable with how it works) seem to think this happens much more than it does
I run the command “yay” once a day if I think of it, every few days if I don’t.
A little less often than that, whenever I think of it, I spend 5 minutes checking for pacnew files (admittedly THIS is potentially a pain compared to other distros, but EOS has a tool that makes it pretty easy)
That’s pretty much it.
Technically you should check the main Arch/EOS/Manjaro page before updating because in the rare event that manual intervention is required there will be instructions there. I usually don’t, and haven’t had a showstopper from it yet.
I can’t remember the last time it took me longer than download time + 5 minutes to upgrade my EOS system, and that includes the recent transition to Plasma 6.
yeah, i mean apart from people satisfying their masochistic desires and highlighting their moral superiority by using CLI (look mama, ima hacker), Arch is genuinely a great OS. and, honestly, like i argued in my post, not as “masochistic” to install as people paint it to be.
There are other distros with the same points, they’re not unique, save for the wiki. A lot of users of other distros refer to the Arch wiki. The AUR is much celebrated but I personally found it annoying having to carefully vet every package and having moved to another distro I don’t miss it.
I think the main reason to choose Arch is it’s for tinkerers/hobbyists. Its community is very enthusiastic which is always nice, though many can become a bit obnoxious on forums.
Verification doesnt help at all if the source is not trusted. All this says is “upstream developers maintain this package”. Unofficial packages can be safe too, like VLC.
It does help prevent actual malware from being downloaded, though, since upstream developers probably won’t publish malware on Flathub.
But this is still a half-measure. I don’t understand why Red Hat and Canonical don’t treat this issue seriously; people on Linux are used to assuming software installed from the repos are safe, and yet Snap and Flatpak are being pushed more and more despite their main repositories being potentially unsafe.
I can’t find it now, but I read that the verification process also includes human review (for the initial verification, not every update), so it should actually prevent “verified” malware (though it does nothing against unverified malware).
This unverified badge does not prevent from malware being downloaded. This is a false statement! An upstream developer can have malicious intention and be verified as the upstream developer. This unverified badge only helps identifying its not a modified version by someone else and is guaranteed to be from the original developer. It does not prevent anyone from downloading and installing unverified apps. If that was the goal, then why having unverified apps in the first place on the store? Yes, because its useful. Therefore people will download unverified apps or just blindly trust verified apps.
At the moment his is enough. But if the Flathub store grows, this can be an issue. Look at the Android and ios app stores; there are plenty of apps from original developers with malicious intentions.
It is reasonable to assume that a verified Flatpak will have a lower chance of containing malware, since initial verification includes manual review (by a Flathub maintainer), and certain changes (like default permissions) also require manual review.
So the way I see it, it does help, but not in a meaningful way.
Because both Red Hat and Canonical are of the “pay us to care” mindset. If you aren’t paying for support, you’re a freeloader and need to do your own research.
That’s not entirely true with Red Hat. There’s a lot of work that they’ve done in the open source community that they haven’t shared back. And canonical seems to think this is a good idea.
Next step, display the “potential unsafe”-badge next to verified or unverified, that can be found on the same page. In example flathub.org/apps/io.github.shiiion.primehack is marked as verified, but if you scroll down you can see the application has full system and data access and is marked as potential unsafe.
It makes it obvious to people whether they are downloading Google Chrome as packaged by Google or as by someone else. That being said, Google Chrome is malware. That being said there is a lot more that needs to be done to truly prevent malware, which will be costly but will hopefully take effect when they’ve got the budget for it
Because if you search Firefox and see a badge that says verified, you can be confident that it was Mozilla that packaged it and added it to FlatHub as opposed to some random scammer.
lemmy.ml
Active