First let me start off by saying that I love Linux. It’s been my daily driver since 2016, and I absolutely hate Windows with a passion. TBH, I don’t mind MacOS; it’s Apple that I have a problem with (and Apple Hardware). I am merely creating this thread because I am a Linux user, and Linux users like to complain to other Linux users about Linux. But our egos will never, ever allow us complain about Linux to an outsider I do think this post is inspired by Mr. Lunduke’s LinuxFest series over the years.
Anyway, I have something specific to complain about: Grub. Why do most distros like to use Grub by default? In all my years of using Linux, which albeit isn’t very long compared to some of you neck-beards out there, I have never understood Grub. My knowledge intake about Linux keeps accelerating with each passing day; it just builds upon itself to and I learn about the OS faster. Yet grub makes no sense to me.
Passing in Kernel parameters is arbitrary with grub and opaque. I didn’t even know what they were until I started using Systemd-Boot on Arch Linux. I actually didn’t start using Systemd-Boot until late last year. Then, I was running Arch on 40% of my machines, but now it makes up only 20%. I didn’t know it then, but switching to systemd-boot would be extremely beneficial in facilitating my understanding of LVM, Kernel Parameters, and dm-crypt. But here’s the kicker. It took me maybe about a month to learn Systemd-Boot, whereas I’ve been using grub pretty much since I started using Linux 5 years ago (the only exception is my RaspberryPi 3 - which was my first Linux machine). And it’s not because I used Systemd on Arch; previously, I installed Arch exclusively using Grub. My point is that grub is obtuse to configure. Not only that, but grub rescue has always been a major headache for me. I used to take the lazy way out and just reinstall the whole system if I got a grub rescue prompt - this was really only a thing that happened often in my early days of using Linux xD.
I’m not complaining that grub is bloat or monolithic or anything like that. On the contrary, grub is way less monolithic than Systemd-Boot - which in my opinion is objectively better than grub. Systemd-boot also boots faster, it’s cleaner and more elegant to use, and it’s easier to diagnose and fix boot problems when using systemd-boot.
Others can rant about Linux technologies in replies. It can be PulseAudio, Systemd, or Gnome. But it would be cool to see other people’s grievances with Linux laid bare. Keep it civil though please.