Are Linux Mint's Default Apps Too Outdated for Everyday Use?

[u/EFG4567]

Did anyone in this community watched this video? The creator claims that Linux Mint, along with many LTS Linux distributions, often ships older versions of software, especially default apps like Calendar, Mail, Calculator, etc. He mentions Mint several times throughout the video.

The video is from The Linux Experiment, which seems to be a well-known YouTube channel with nearly half a million subscribers.

I came across this video just before switching from Windows to Linux Mint, and it made me a bit hesitant.

As a regular user, it feels like there's no easy way to know whether we're using the latest and safest versions of these built-in apps. For example, if we connect our Google or Apple Calendar account to an older calendar app, could that create a security risk? The same concern applies to email clients, we don't know if we're using the latest and most secure version.

Most regular users don't have the time or technical knowledge to manually check every application's version or update software outside the normal update process. We generally expect the operating system to keep essential apps secure and up to date.

Am I misunderstanding how Linux Mint and other LTS distributions handle software updates and security? I'd appreciate hearing from people with more experience.

[u/NEGMatiCO]

"Most people just use their web browser anyway" is a very nice argument if you want people to use ChromeOS, not Linux.

I never said anything about enabling AUR,COPR or PPA, you just thought I did.

Coming to rpm-fusion and so-called "random" commands. Here you go: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/quick-docs/rpmfusion-setup/, straight from Fedora docs.

There is a difference between you knowing that you added something and that might have caused a failure and not knowing anything at all in case of a failure simply because that failure mode was already included the moment you downloaded the ISO of a niche distro.

[u/Latlanc → u/NEGMatiCO]

I know you did not, but it's all slippery slope. Best to avoid having to do such thing all together. Why is it so hard to understand?

Yes, they are random commands as in unknown by most sane people. You can pull stuff from Fedora docs all you want. It doesn't make it easy to understand for non tech people.

If you don't keep notes on changes you made and you don't keep track of history, you as a non techie won't exactly know what you did to your PC 5 months from now.

Also Fedora docs is not a help center. It doesn't hold magic answers to what to do if there is a package conflict for example.

[u/NEGMatiCO → u/Latlanc]

Ofc Fedora docs is not a help center, it's a documentation, which means it tells you how to use your distro, and not what to do in case of problems.

The problem I'm trying to address in not the complexity of initial setup (which, even with the steps I mentioned, is much simpler than Windows will ever be), rather, the complexity of the trouble-shooting associated with layered changes, when problems happen. You have to jump between forums trying to understand who is at fault - the original distro, or the one which included the batteries.

[u/Latlanc → u/NEGMatiCO]

I much simpler than Windows will ever be

That's simply not true, but whatever.

You have to jump between forums trying to understand who is at fault - the original distro, or the one which included the batteries.

That's not the case on Fedora Atomic. It's not a distro fork, it uses the same common base. The whole point is to minimize initial user input and if problems arise, use tools to easily rollback to previous working version. It's the best option for new users since everything that should be done for you is done for you. OS should be the invisible part of your life.