Difference between silverblue / universal Blue / Bluefin / Aurora / Bazzite ?
Hi ! I'm a little confuse between all immutable versions based on fedora. Is this correct : universal blue = tool to create image, based on fedora atomic desktop ?
With universal blue, they created :
Bluefin = gnome
Bluefin-DX = gnome + developper tools
Aurora = kde
Aurora-DX = kde + developper tools
Bazzite = games
What the difference between silverble and bluefin for example, and which are you using ?
My quick play w them: fedora(company) atomic distros like silver blue(gnome) vanilla way. Ublue(some independent developers) making their own versions/spins of fedora, eg bluefin, aurora, bazzite. Focused on a better experience.
Secureblue(some independent developers), also making their own versions/spins of fedora but focused on privacy/security.
None of them could see my network printer so I went back to normal fedora.
Hi Jorge,
Thanks so much for reply.
Love your energy on your project and YouTube videos.
My printer is brother MFC-L2750DW.
Sorry I'm "experienced" linux mint xfce user, and wanted to give fedora gnome a go for Wayland, selinux enforcing and zram for security privacy yada yada.
When I came across your project, you and your team done such an awesome job.
So I guess if I can get the printer up and working I'll go back to bluefin.
Thanks again for TLC. ❤️
Secureblue ships Chromium, is lead by a single person and does not care about privacy "if it leads to worse security" (i.e. preinstalling Chromium and removing Firefox, even though there is no evidence that Chromium is more secure, it may likely be less secure)
Ultimately, (some) decisions are made by a single person. However, the list of maintainers suggests that contributions are welcome.
> even though there is no evidence that Chromium is not even less secure)
The double negation makes it hard to understand; but if I would give it a try, then I would get the following:
"even though there is evidence that Chromium is even less secure)"
If the above represents your views, could you provide said evidence?
even though there is no evidence that Chromium is not even less secure
What's your take on Madaidan's (i.e. security researcher on projects like Kicksecure and Whonix) article on the matter? I'm aware that it's a bit outdated. However, would you be able to confidently claim that nothing found within is relevant today?
The article is very outdated and possibly not complete. ChromeOS uses Linux so you can assume it is very secure there.
I miss a debunk on the exact points by firefox devs.
But people everywhere told me madaidans article is not correct. Torbrowser also still doesnt use Chromium for various reasons. And that is the most security critical browser there is.