this post was submitted on 17 Apr 2025
167 points (96.1% liked)

Linux

58078 readers
233 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Title is quite self-explanatory, reason I wonder is because every now and then I think to myself "maybe distro X is good, maybe I should try it at some point", but then I think a bit more and realise it kind of doesn't make a difference - the only thing I feel kinda matters is rolling vs non-rolling release patterns.

My guiding principles when choosing distro are that I run arch on my desktop because it's what I'm used to (and AUR is nice to have), and Debian on servers because some people said it's good and I the non-rolling release gives me peace of mind that I don't have to update very often. But I could switch both of these out and I really don't think it would make a difference at all.

(page 4) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] accideath@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

Nobara: Has all the gaming features I want on my gaming pc (like gamescope) and is htpc capable. Also, it’s based on Fedora, which I’m familiar with.

Fedora: I like gnome and it’s always fairly up to date and rock solid. Great on my laptop.

Have considered switching to openSUSE though. It’s German (as am I), it’s the first Linux distro I ever used (on my granddad’s PC, more than a decade ago) and I’ve heard a lot of good about tumbleweed.

[–] daggermoon@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago (3 children)

I use Arch (btw) because CachyOS was giving me issues.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] BradleyUffner@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

It was the first one using Wayland by default that worked on my machine out of the box.

[–] Endymion_Mallorn@kbin.melroy.org 3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Mint here. It looks like Windows and runs the software and hardware I want. Simple as that.

[–] SauceFlexr@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

Just installed it today. I had been using KDE Neon for the last 6+ months and really enjoyed it, but I had issues I couldn't google my way out of.

[–] savvywolf@pawb.social 3 points 4 months ago

For my main desktop I use Mint because it just works, widely supported and Cinnamon is good (sadly no Wayland yet. ;_;). I also use Home-manager for my configuration because it allows me to easily just specify my config as a set of files I can check into git.

For my server, I use NixOS, because having all my configuration in a few text files is very nice to get an overview of what my server is doing.

[–] SolarPunker@slrpnk.net 3 points 4 months ago

Arch (EndeavourOS but it's the same with an installer, basically): AUR, great Wiki, great community and fresh packages. I'm always open to new stuff but all of this is really hard to beat.

[–] malkien 3 points 4 months ago

Garuda on desktop:

  • wanted to try Arch
  • is rolling
  • has a custom KDE theme that I happen to like
  • gaming edition preinstalls a number of tools that I would install anyway

Fedora on work laptop:
20 years ago it was easier to find rpm packages for some enterprise apps, then just stuck with it

ChimeraOS on minipc:
does couch gaming well

[–] davidagain@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

Why do you use the distro you use?

People said Ubuntu is easy, but I prefer green to orange so I went with Mint.

[–] thirtyfold8625@thebrainbin.org 3 points 4 months ago

I use openSUSE because I want to see the license used with a package before installing it, and I can do that by using YaST. Also, it seems that version numbers are used consistently which enables elegant downgrading (I found that the pacman system is probably capable of supporting this too, but the operating system(s) that use it don't seem to use version numbers consistently and I've had a bad experience with downgrading in the past). I reviewed packaging systems other than rpm but it seemed that rpm while used with openSUSE was the most robust.

I also like having a bootable image with a streamlined installation process that is clearly supported by the operating system maintainers: I was tired of worrying about whether I set up LUKS correctly while setting up Arch Linux, and just having a checkbox for "encrypt the disk" makes me a lot calmer. Knowing that I can use a guided process if I want to reinstall the operating system also gives me some peace of mind.

It's also nice to get practice with an operating system that is more similar to "enterprise" Linux distributions: it's probably useful to get practice managing my personal computer(s) and at the same time get knowledge that is probably re-usable while interacting with Red Hat Enterprise Linux or SUSE Linux Enterprise itself. However, this was not a primary consideration for choosing an operating system for myself.

Luckily, my choice can currently also get some support from https://www.privacyguides.org/en/desktop/

I also like NixOS, but it doesn't seem to use secure boot by default, and I'd prefer to have that handled without needing input from me, so I only use it when that feature isn't available at all.

[–] originaltnavn@lemm.ee 3 points 4 months ago

Debian Sid, the unstable rolling release branch of Debian. It has the worst of both Debian and Arch!

On a more serious note, it allows me to have a somewhat standard Debian system with bleeding edge tooling.

[–] ECB@feddit.org 3 points 4 months ago

I use opensuse (tumbleweed and slowroll) because I just wanted to try it out a few years back and it mostly just works.

If I were to reinstall today, I'd probably use fedora again, since it's much easier to use things like Waydroid.

[–] LeFantome@programming.dev 3 points 4 months ago

I favour Arch because I prefer everything I want to install to be in the package repo and for it to be a version actually new enough to use.

But I actually use EndeavourOS because it is 99% Arch but installs easily with full hardware support on everything I own (including a T2 Macbook). It never fails me.

And now I have realized that I can use Distrobox to get the Arch repos and the AUR on any dostro I wish.

So, I now have Chimera Linux on 4 machines because it is the best engineered distro in my view. The system supervisor, system compiler, and C library matter to me (not to everyone). All these machines have the AUR on them (via distrobox). Best of all worlds.

[–] Swakkel@sh.itjust.works 3 points 4 months ago

CachyOS is making my old ass 2012 desktop feeling snappy again. I'm by no means a pro user and everything seems to work and god damn installing and updating stuff is easy and fast!

[–] RotatingParts@lemmy.ml 2 points 4 months ago

I use Kubuntu. I like the KDE desktop and I like a Debian based OS. If someone is going to make their software for Linux, it will almost certainly be available at least for Debian. If, say you want it for Arch, you need to wait for someone to put it in the AUR or build it yourself.

[–] Crazyslinkz@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

Arch, because it has what I want for gaming. Also its simple, lots of help in forums and community driven. Im not too big on rolling, but it's really stable and works.

I have distro hopped a bit, used fedora, ubuntu, debian, and manjora. Stopped on arch as, I like my xfce set up with arch.

KISS - keep it stupid simple or simple stupid.

[–] ProtonBadger@lemmy.ca 2 points 4 months ago

I agree, only release schedule really matters, package managers are easy to learn.. I don't think the AUR is that special either, I've always found everything I needed no matter the distro, but maybe I don't have exotic requirements.

I'm fine with most distros, though I don't bother with the fast rolling ones anymore, I did for a few years but I don't see the point for me. I'm happy with Fedora or an Ubuntu derivative and major updates are one command which is trouble free unless you've changed something in a non-standard way.

Now using Pop 24.04 as it's on a stable base and I code COSMIC stuff, oh and they update kernel/nvidia/mesa on a regular basis (I use hybrid Gfx, Intel iGPU and NV offload). I'll probably stick with PopOS or Fedora COSMIC spin/copr moving forward.

Use case for me is coding and gaming.

[–] owenfromcanada@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

I've used Debian, Ubuntu, Mint, and Manjaro. All viable options. I'm currently using Mint on my daily driver, Ubuntu on my HTPCs, and Debian on my servers.

I liked the rolling release aspect of Manjaro, but I missed having a system that works with DEB files. I'm not a fan of flatpak/snap/appimage due to the size (I've often had to use slower internet connections). I settled on Mint for my daily driver because it has great and easy compatibility for my hardware (specifically an Nvidia GPU). It worked okay on Manjaro as well, but I've found it easier to select and switch between GPU drivers on Mint. And Cinnamon is my favorite DE, and that's sort of "native" to Mint.

I'm using vanilla Ubuntu on my HTPCs because I have Proton VPN on them, and it's the only setup I've found that doesn't have issues with the stupid keyring thing. And Proton VPN's app only really natively supports Ubuntu. The computers only ever use a web browser, so the distro otherwise doesn't matter that much.

I'm using Debian on my servers because it's the distro I'm most familiar with, especially without a GUI. Plus it'll run until the hardware fails, maybe a little longer.

[–] UntouchedWagons@lemmy.ca 2 points 4 months ago

Debian because it just works. I am interested in trying NixOS though.

[–] yaroto98@lemmy.org 2 points 4 months ago

Garuda - because like endeavor it's arch for lazy people, plus I got sold on the gaming edition by how much I like the theme and the latest drivers. But that's just what got me to try it, what sold me on it is when I had a vm of it that ran out of hdd space mid kernel update. I shut it down to expand the drive, booted it back up and no kernels present. Fiddling around in grub in a panic made me realize snappertools auto snapshots btrfs before updating. I think only once in my life (out of dozens of tries) has Microsoft's restorepoints actually worked for me. Booting to the snapshot was effortless, clicking through to recover to that snapshot was a breeze. I rebooted again just to make sure it was working and it did. Re-updated and I was back in action.

That experience made me love garuda. I highly recommend snappertools+btrfs from now on and use it whenever I can. Yes, preventative tools and warnings would have stopped it from happening, but you can't stop everything, and it's a comfort to have.

[–] randomcruft@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 4 months ago

Fedora… it took way to long to figure out how to remove all the software I didn’t need / want and still have a functional system. I will not subject myself to that pain again 🙂

[–] Lettuceeatlettuce@lemmy.ml 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Depends on the use case.

I use Nobara on my gaming rig because I wanted up-to-date packages without being on the cutting edge like Arch. And I also wanted all the lower level gaming optimizations without having to set it all up manually. Plus, KDE is soooooo nice.

Debian on my servers because I want extreme stability with a community-driven distro.

Linux Mint on my personal laptops, because I like having the good things from Ubuntu without all the junk. Plus the Cinnamon desktop environment has been rock stable for me. It's my goto workhorse distro. If I don't need something with a specialized or specific use case, I throw Mint on.

Arch on my old junker devices that I don't use much because I like making them run super fast and look sexy and testing out different WM's and DE's.

Void on my junkers that I actually want to use frequently because it's super performant and light on resources without needing to be built manually like Arch.

Ubuntu server if I am feeling stanky and lazy and just need something quick for a testing VM or container host in my home lab.

[–] incogtino@lemmy.zip 2 points 4 months ago

I've been on Mint with Cinnamon for about 5 years across desktops, laptops, and home server

I had to update a machine with a version of Mint that was EoL this year, so I just upgraded through several major versions in a row with no issues

It was interesting seeing how much more polished each upgrade process was

[–] liliumstar@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 4 months ago

Arch on desktop/laptop because I'm very comfortable with it, and I can set it up the way I like.

Debian on servers because it's stable and nearly everything has a package available, or at least instructions for building.

Same as OP, but I'm not likely to change them out. I've tried a lot of distros over the years and this is what works best for me.

[–] haque@lemm.ee 2 points 4 months ago

I started off with ubuntu in 2009, switched to mint some years later, because of the cinnamon desktop environment which I liked better than the new ubuntu unity flavour.

This year I switched to manjaro with kde plasma. Just for fun honestly.

[–] the_citizen@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

I used a bunch of distributions (like Gentoo, Arch, Slackware, Debian etc.). Then I created a distribution-like system with LFS -BLFS and now using itbecause I want to see how Linux works in a detailed way. It's a little painful but it's not a problem if you are a masochist person who doesn't have to do anything else.

[–] communism@lemmy.ml 2 points 4 months ago

Artix as my daily driver because of the AUR, and I like runit. I no longer feel the need to distro hop; I'm happy here.

[–] RivNexus@lemm.ee 2 points 4 months ago

Bazzite. Just works really Convenient updates, and more straightforward features

I started using Linux with Arch as first distro Fedora KDE and Arch would be my other picks

[–] chunes@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

Ubuntu because it was the first distro (after Mint and PopOS) to boot on my eclectic hardware.

[–] NutWrench@lemmy.ml 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Started with Linux Mint. Added the KDE desktop. And I'm done. This distro does everything I want.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Croquette@sh.itjust.works 2 points 4 months ago

Laziness. I used Ubuntu, then tried a few distros based on it, and Linux Mint worked well enough out of the box.

I have a few issues with it, but i have easy workarounds so that's good enough for me.

[–] ColdWater@lemmy.ca 2 points 4 months ago

Vanilla Arch, because for me it's the easiest to use and everything just works and never any had instability issue like other distros I tried

[–] Nibodhika@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

Home: Arch, because I'm a lazy ass who likes the AUR.

Work: Ubuntu, because the laptop they gave me came with it

Servers: I don't have a particular distro I use for all my servers, it depends on what's my frame of mind when setting the server up. But I'm considering learning NixOS for this use case.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›