Hi, I wanted to try Debian but i found out that its foundation relies heavily on systemd. I’m using a Lenovo Ideapad 500-15isk that’s why I want to be away from systemd’s bloat, I’m still not an advanced user but i had Ubuntu + KDE for 2 Years (GUI only) then used CachyOS + Hyprland(Caelestia shell) for 1.5 years ( Used Terminal more than GUI). This time I want to make the OS usage as low as possible but also not old/ugly. Thank you in advance.
It seems like my Windows installation was using over 4 Gb of RAM to just do absolutely nothing. Now I can be doing multiple things with Arch and systemd and it’s about 2.1 Gb unless I’m gaming or something. Do people using the older init functions actually perform even better? That would be wild! If so, I might need to grab a copy of Artix or try OpenBSD again. I had a Linux usage gap and just don’t recall the resource pull from old init any longer. My first installation was on a machine with a Windows XP dual boot. I think it was an x32 processor rather than an x32-x64. You could run those on just 4 Gb. Maybe even 2.
The thing is, the really older init functions like Sysvinit or even Upstart aren’t all that’s being compared to Systemd. Alternatives include OpenRC, which is just a bit older than systemd and also improved during this time, and Dinit, which is newer than systemd.
I recently switched from Arch to Artix witg Dinit, I can’t make a full comparison since I also didn’t reinstall every program after the change and this might play into it, but I can at least say that the time it takes to boot is reduced, and I saw some people online making the same constatation.
As for the comparision with windows… I think regardless of init system and distros it is generally true that Linux does more out of less than windows, and that difference completely dwarfs the difference between specific init systems on Linux.