 My next long-term review is going to feature Artix Linux and the only reason it was really on the pole in the first place was because several people Asked me to take a look at it and I thought well, you know, I just throw it on the pole Frankly, I thought open Suza would win and it came close But Artix ended up being the victor and I'm going to spend some time in Artix links I'm already started taking a look at it that video will come out in the next couple weeks or so But I what I didn't want to do in that video was take a long time talking about system Instead in that video I will talk about my experiences with running up distro that doesn't have system D Instead in this video today, I'm going to talk about the problems people seem to have with system D itself Now this is a topic that is very widely covered But if I feel like It's a topic that just keeps coming up and coming up because people for whatever reason just don't like system D Or at least a lot of people don't like system D The poll that I put up had 17% of the people Answer that system D was bloated another 52% said it was bloated, but they didn't care so a vast majority people think the system D is bad for one reason or another So what I thought I'd do today is talk about the three arguments people seem to have against system D And then I will try to kind of counter them or say if I agree with them or whatever So let's go ahead and jump in So the first argument is the biggest argument and that is that system D is bloated Frankly this argument is Not a good argument at all because system D is not a single program saying system D is bloated is saying like Linux is bloated now you can make a good argument that Linux is bloated, but Linux is not a singular program GNU slash Linux is a huge collection of many many programs that enable the operating system to run System D is similar in that because it's a collection of Programs that do many different things. There's a huge misconception out there saying that system D isn't in its system That's not correct system D just happens to have an in its system contained within it There's several other things that system D does from enabling system connectivity to Replacing grub to several other High-level and low-level functions that enable your system to run system D is a huge suite of Software it's not just an in its system. You can't really say system D itself is bloated because it's not just one thing It's in an umbrella over several smaller programs many smaller programs. I should say it's just not a very good argument Now if you were arguing this the init system inside system D is bloated I don't really see how you could argue with that because it's just one of the programs It's not I can't tell you how many lines the init system part of system D actually has compared to something like open RC or run it But I wouldn't be surprised if they're fairly comparable because they're just in its systems System D just happens to have other things that it also does that Open RC and run it and similar init systems don't actually do because those are meant to be just in its systems The next argument that I saw in the comments of that poll was that system D enables lock-in to a service So basically the argument is this Because it's so popular It's become a standard which means that Linux itself is so reliant on it It would be hard to move away from now if you ask me. This is the best argument against system D I'm not saying it's a good argument, but it's definitely better than system D is bloated Definitely because system D is the most used system to initialize programs among many other things Linux does rely on it The vast majority of Linux distros out there be they desktop Linux or server Linux distros Reliant system D for various services throughout the system that enable it to run and It would be really hard if for whatever reason the people behind system D decided to make a huge change to system D And everybody hated it. It'd be really hard for each of those distros to find something else, but My argument against this one is that other init systems do exist So just because we happen to rely on a standard similar to what we do with like Xorg or Pulse audio doesn't mean that we can't switch to something else We've proven that we can do that as a community. We can move to something else We either move to Wayland or we're moving to pipe wire and if system D happens to become Horrible or the developers abandon it or it becomes a security problem We'll move on to something different. We've proven nimble enough as a community to do that now That leads us to The last argument and it's kind of similar is that system D is controlled by a major corporation and this is true the system D Development is vastly funded by red hat and in this case probably IBM as well because they now own red hat and My argument against this is that yeah, so what? Does that make a boom too bad because it's backed by a major corporation? Does it make fedora bad because it's backed by a major corporation? Just because something is backed by a major corporation doesn't necessarily Automatically make it evil. There's this sense in the open source community that if you have the back of a major corporation or a major corporation has control over your development that it's automatically makes that product or project bad That's just not automatically the case Now if it was Google having control over system D we could have a different conversation But I don't think that we you can argue that red hat is inherently evil and bad just because they're a major corporation Or even because they're owned by a major corporation I think that it's actually a good thing for the most part because if we want Linux to succeed even on a such a small scale as it currently is Linux needs those major corporate backers who are invested not only in funding Linux projects But also developing them because developers don't work for free so if we want developers to put their effort into developing things like system D or GNOME or KDE or whatever a Lot of those projects that I just named have major corporate backing now You can argue that because system B is controlled by a major corporation It's vastly developed by a major corporation that that is different than having just a backing of a major corporation You could argue that and I can see that point of view but my argument against that is that it's open source if red hat decided to go through and And Completely ruined system D like they did with sent OS. Let's just say they did I don't think they will but let's say they did The community could as people did with sent OS fork it and come out with a you know system E You know whatever, you know That's the nature of open source if that scenario came to pass System D would be forked almost immediately and it would probably be forked by a company that had the resources To actually do things with it, you know similar to what sent to us happened with sent sent to us So those are the three arguments against system D There are probably a few more out there that I just haven't heard about because people seem to really hate system D for whatever reason and The best thing about Linux is that there are other in it systems out there that you can use now in my opinion And from my brief experience so far with Artix They're not as good as system D simply because they don't do as much But that'll be a topic for my next video when I talk about Artix itself. So if you Like this video make sure you hit the like and subscribe button. You can follow me on Twitter at the Linux cast You can support me on patreon at patreon.com slash Linux cast Before I go I'd like to take a moment to thank my current patrons Devon Chris east coast web gen 2 is fun to Marcus Megalyn spend Jackson knife and tool Joshua Lee Mitchell arts in America Can't mr. Fox. Thanks everybody for watching. I'll see you next time