When do you consider a system to be bloated?

joel, 1 month ago

My laptop is 6 years old and has been running arch Linux with xfce for most of that time. I got tired of maintaining it and changed to an “easy” Linux mint distro. It takes much longer to boot up now and feels generally sluggish in comparison to a minimal arch install. So from experience, in older hardware having a bloated distro can really slow down your system.

muhyb, 1 month ago

It’s relative. If you installed everything you need, then it probably isn’t bloated. Bloat is something you don’t need and keep getting updates. My home server has 300+ packages while my desktop has 900+ packages (cannot tell the exact numbers on mobile). I’m currently on EndeavourOS as well, though I’m thinking about moving to Void.

eager_eagle, 1 month ago (edited 1 month ago)

maybe if it has too many things I don’t want.

But I find the concept a bit silly. A large number of installed things doesn’t usually matter if they’re not running. I had over 5k packages in my previous kubuntu that I was running for some 3y and it was just fine. The time and effort I’d spend cleaning it up and installing things as needed wouldn’t translate into any perceived benefit imo.

I’m now running endeavour with a third of this number of packages, since it’s a fresh install and not ubuntu. But other than some storage space and missing packages if I try to build something, I can’t say there’s much of a difference. As for storage, packages rank low in usage, for my desktop anyway.

thingsiplay, 1 month ago

Have in mind that package count is unique to each package manager and how the distribution packages. So those numbers of package count are not really meant to be compared across distributions. Unless it is basically the same distribution in another coat. BTW I am also running EndeavourOS, so we can compare each other well. :-) My desktop has 1.5k packages with pacman and 14 through flatpak. To me this is already “bloated” compared to the initial installation. Especially as I was a tiling window manager user and now use KDE Plasma.

The term “bloat” is off course relative; that’s why you ask this question in the first place, right? Besides that the term is also often used to just exaggerate and not meant literally, just to denounce (I had to look up the word, hopefully it’s correct :D). It depends on the context of what people mean by bloat and what their goals are. I think it’s obvious that a slim distribution can still be bloat for someone else. In example if the initial installation already has most application a user needs, then there is not much left to install and the user may feel its slim. For someone else who handpicks every single bit, this bloated mess might look … well bloated.

It also depends on what the goals of the installation is, if multiple users are using it, what the purpose of the machine is (laptop, server, gaming, programming, nothing) and what hardware it has. For some people the entire concept of a desktop environment or systemd are bloat. Not because the user bloated the system, but the distribution is.

I don’t know man. It doesn’t matter what others say, as long as you are happy; and as long as your system functions well. Don’t forget, the more libraries, packages and applications you have installed, the slower are the updates and the bigger of a chance for failure or security issues can arise. There are good reasons to maintain a slim system and I just listed a few important ones. But whatever it is, don’t let people tell you what bloat means, because you should have your own definition of the word. Just like what you think is good and bad. And my reply gone longer than expected.

Edit: I forgot to mention something. One of the reasons I feel a system is bloated, when it has ton of packages and applications installed that I don’t need or use. Maybe a simple small application has ton of dependencies, which makes it feel like totally bloated.

governorkeagan, 1 month ago

Have in mind that package count is unique to each package manager and how the distribution packages.

Didn’t even think about that, but it makes total sense.

Besides that the term is also often used to just exaggerate and not meant literally

Totally agree, it makes for a good video/blog title that gets clicks. Those videos/blogs can still be interesting and informative, but, like you said it tends to be exaggerated.

bbbhltz, 1 month ago

I don’t feel like my system is bloated.

It probably isn’t bloated.

I guess it’s subjective, but when do you consider a system to be bloated?

If someone is testing out several different DEs or WMs and installing meta-packages, then I suppose I might say that things are bloated because they could end up having multiple apps to control the same preferences along with different libraries, etc., and then when they decide to update it takes ages. That would be bloated for me. I have tried the minimal stuff before. Like you said, hundreds of packages, not thousands. But, I didn’t install any manpages. So when I decided I wanted those manpages the number of packages ballooned. Nothing was really bloated, just a number on neofetch going up.

governorkeagan, 1 month ago

This summarises my thought process on the whole thing really nicely.

Deckweiss, 1 month ago (edited 1 month ago)

You answered it yourself in your post.

It is subjective.

---

I think the concept applies more to whats preinstalled and less to what you yourself install

To illustrate, personally I think:

Ubuntu is bloat, because when I used it it was a hassle to remove everythink I knew I never would use.

Archinstall without template is not bloat, because there is nothing installed that I would not use.

But archinstall with for example the KDE Plasma template is very bloated and it is a pain to uninstall what I don’t need because of the meta packages.