I don’t know why you guys are using LinuxServer.io for ha installation.
I’m just using
ghcr.io/home-assistant/home-assistant:stable
image as this is recomended in official documentation.
I’m not using this because official documentation, then just because it works and I have no special issues with it.
Everything else like piper and whisper have their own containers and can be easily integrated with ha.
yup, this is the way
If I end up switching off of my Supervised install to stay in a “Supported” state, that would be my most likely to use course of action, as a container install won’t work for me due to the lack of add-on support. For things like HA I prefer a dedicated machine so going virtual seems overkill to me but I would most likely just convert my current Debian box that I dedicate to HA over to proxmox and only host the HA VM on it.
appart from old Architecture no longer supported, not a lot of change. agree that for some people it is a change how they have set ha up, but not world shocking changes… set against more focussed support, please move ahead, but please help people with legacy systems to transition
cheers,
me
With the clarifications added to the OP by Frenck, I am a bit more okay with this proposal.
I’ve been using the Supervised installation since it was first introduced, and frankly, I’m really not on board with this deprecation proposal.
For users like me — who aren’t relying on the community to figure out how to plug in a Zigbee stick or why their MQTT broker isn’t working — Supervised is the perfect middle ground. I’ve got powerful hardware already running 24/7, and I want to use it for more than just Home Assistant. Supervised gives me that flexibility, while still letting me take advantage of the add-on ecosystem — which, let’s be honest, is a huge part of what makes Home Assistant so appealing. Could I replicate everything manually with Core? Sure. But why go out of my way to make it harder when the add-ons do the job so well?
Deprecating Supervised isn’t just removing a convenience — it’s removing an entire use case. It forces users like me toward dedicated hardware just to run HAOS, and that’s not just a financial burden — it’s environmentally irresponsible. I’ve already got a stable, secure, and powerful setup. Why should I be pushed into buying a Pi or NUC to run what is, at the end of the day, a smart home hub?
And the “support burden” argument? I’m not buying it. Most of the support traffic I see comes from HAOS users running on basic Raspberry Pi setups. In contrast, Supervised users are often the ones with the experience — the ones answering the questions, not asking them. The idea that removing Supervised will reduce support needs just doesn’t line up with the reality I see in the community. The people using Supervised installs aren’t typically the ones posting “HELP MY LIGHTS WON’T TURN ON.”
What worries me even more is the bigger trend this represents. Over the past few years, Home Assistant has been shifting away from flexibility and configurability, and toward a more locked-down, GUI-centric model. I get the goal of making it more accessible — that’s great. But it shouldn’t come at the expense of the power users who helped grow this platform into what it is. First it’s Supervised — what’s next? YAML? Don’t need to version control your config anymore, just trust the GUI and the backup system, right?
Supervised is the sweet spot for people who want to run Home Assistant as part of a broader Linux environment, while still benefiting from the simplicity and polish of the HA ecosystem. Removing it would be a huge step backward — not just for advanced users, but for the platform as a whole.
Then supervised is not the solution for you. It prohibits the installation of other applications or services. If you are doing this you are already running an unsupported system. So nothing actually changes for you if this proposal is accepted.
Using your powerful hardware to run VMs or Docker containers for HA and your other applications would be a far better option. It would require no new purchases and would actually be a supported system.
The numbers from github have been collated and this is actually the case:
As far as I know, this architecture is 32-bit but isn’t in your list above:
CPU architecture armv7l
I’m assuming it too will go away?
I’m neutral on the change itself.
What I’m impressed most with is the level of communication here.
Well-written OP, good two-way dialog, questions answered directly and respectfully. This is the right path. Thank you.
If you were on the forums, then you will see the community ditching the core and supervised installation types too.
It is extremely hard to guess what setup users have installed HA on and MANY users think that because they can use Ubuntu as a desktop, then it is no problem running HA as a headless server.
Some users gets a bit cross when they are told that the community can only give hints and they have to dig more themself or that their setup is not supported, even though they run a supervised installation, because they think they can install whatever on the OS in supervised.
It is just not a good experience for them, so if the community needs to step up to this task, then you as an advocate will have to be in front there.
This is already happening in the community.
The devs will still support it, but often it is not really a HA issue, but an issue with the environment HA is installed in and that is then up to the user to solve and the community can not know every possible setup there is, so it often just give some guesses and let the user hang there, because no more can be done.
As hard as I had to work to get HA Supervised on my machine, I don’t want it to go away! I can’t say I have had any issues with updates and such, or maybe I just consider it part of the package. I guess I will replace my HPxw4400 workstation. Unless someone knows how to convert from BIOS to UEFI.
UEFI is a hardware thing, so if it does not support it today, then it never will.
Yea, I was just wishing.
That CPU does support virtualisation though. So a VM install is a way forward if you do not want to replace it.
VM is on my list of things to conquer. I guess I am headed that way soon. Thanks guys.
Do check out Proxmox, then. It’s free and open source, uses minimal overhead, and the learning curve isn’t bad… at least to learn the parts necessary to run HAOS. There’s an excellent community guide to help you get started.
Hmmm…
Yeah ok.
I had my first taste of Proxmox last year when setting up a Scrypted NVR. It’s certainly not intuitive. Helper scripts (there is one for HA) make it easy. I recommend watching this: https://youtu.be/kcpu4z5eSEU?si=pKcWiI-HG9EfLlR9
Add-ons are just docker containers with a configuration already set for HA. You could run any of them as docker containers alongside HA 
Surely a simple google result can get you that info? I don’t know anything about that machine, but HP workstations typically have legacy and UEFI boot modes.
Secondly, you don’t need to change anything. You can still run what you have but it will be unsupported, meaning you won’t get support from official sources (github, documentation), only the community (forums, discord, etc).
EDIT: I just checked out the release for that workstation, 2006… That’s 20 years old, that’s a pretty steep expectation for any modern software. Anyways, there’s a bios update in 2010 that may contain the option to boot from UEFI if the original doesn’t. UEFI started getting widely used in 2005, so I wouldn’t be suprised if that mobo does or does not support it.
