Literally the only reason I use Zorin is because I am too computer illiterate to put the stuff i like about its desktop environment in a more lightweight distro or on Qubes
side note i like the use of calvin over that other guy
yeah fuck crowder
don't fuck him tho
not unless you want to be a victim of abuse i guess
Crowder's one of my favorite musicians... Oh wait, different Crowder.
Not a hot take at all. Asking someone to go from a GUI heavy operating system to a command line heavy one and be just as productive is lunacy. Like all major changes it is important to ween off the old thing.
My biggest hurdle with the switch has been permission related issues, and you can't deal with those cleanly with a UI, and every help thread under the sun throws out a bunch of command line commands giving a solution without explaining why those changes are needed. It may seem like Unix 101 to experienced Linux users, but it is really cryptic to newcomers coming from operating systems that are...cough more lenient with their permissions.
There is also a mentality that UIs are much more idiot proof than command line. UIs are written by people who actually know the OS so we can't accidentally delete our home folder because of a typo. It is a very legitimate concern.
Yesterday morning i installed Mint xfce on an old laptop.
I wanted to install synaptics drivers for the touchpad because i use the trackball as mouse but need the touchpad for clicking. Something that isnt configureable in the default driver.
When i copied an example config file and added my line, i rebooted the computer.
The GUI broke because in the example config file, there were "..." To indicate writing further options, but xorg couldnt interpret or ignore it, so i had to figure out how to edit textfiles in the command line.
No fun times, and definetely a risk for new users.
This story is literally every experienced Linux users first horror story.
I still remember the first time I broke my xorg config on my shiny new slackware 10 install in early 2005.
New Linux Users don't even know the difference.
Ha! Yeah, I remember that phase. I was planning to install LXDE as my first distro, simply because I thought the wallpaper looked cool.
I agree - was switching to Fedora about month and a half ago, and only learned about KDE vs Gnome like a week ago, when I was reinstaling to Nobara to fix some NVIDIA issues.
I did hear terms like KDE or Gnome thrown around, but never really realized that it's actually and important choice. And once you add X11 vs Wayland to the mix, it's suddenly so confusing I just subconsciously choose to ignore that choice and went with whatever the OS installed for me. I though that DE chouse is similar to X11 vs Wayland choice, i.e something tha is more about back-end than front-end, and didn't realize that's literally how your OS UI looks and controls, instead of how it works in the background (which I now know is what X11 vs Wayland is actually about)
Turned out I really don't like Gnome (Which was default for Fedora), but love KDE, which was thankfully a default for Nobara.
So, if you're ever recommending Linux to someone, be it in a comment or somwhere else, or someone is asking for a recommended distro, please include a short paragraph about the importance of choosing the correct DE, and explanation of what it is and that you can change it!
Great take. But you know the real sneaky one that trips you up? File system.
I wouldn't call myself a beginner, but every time I install a Linux system seriously I see those filesystem choices and have to dig through volumes of turbo-nerd debates on super fine intricacies between them, usually debating their merits in super high-risk critical contexts.
I still don't come away with knowing which one will be best for me long-term in a practical sense.
As well as tons of "It ruined my whole system" or "Wrote my SSD to death" FUD that is usually outdated but nevertheless persists.
Honestly nowadays I just happily throw BTRFS on there because it's included on the install and allows snapshots and rollbacks. EZPZ.
For everything else, EXT4, and for OS-shared storage, NTFS.
But it took AGES to arrive to this conclusion. Beginners will have their heads spun at this choice, guaranteed. It's frustrating.
I did NTFS because both windows and Linux can read it. Do I know literally any other fact about formatting systems? Nope. I'm pretty sure I don't need to, I'm normie-adjacent. I just want my system to work so I can use the internet, play games, and do word processing.
Ext4 is the safe bet for a beginner. The real question is with or without LVM. Generally I would say with but that abstraction layer between the filesystem and disk can really be confusing if you've never dealt with it before. A total beginner should probably go ext4 without LVM and then play around in a VM with the various options to become informed enough to do something less vanilla.
Just installed Mint to try it out because it looks similar to Windows. Don't judge me.
Oh I’ve judged you! And I find you guilty of making an acceptable decision that suites your preferences.
someone who switches away from the distro's default desktop environment is not a new user.
Yes, but a lot of them have multiple DEs (Ubuntu/Lubuntu/Kubuntu/Xubuntu...) and sometimes the DE is specific to the distros (Mint).
For windows users that go to Linux I always recommend KDE as it looks like windows and it's easy for them to understand and use it!
Start recommending Cinnamon then, it's the best DE when switching from Windows.
Well sure. My approach for looking for a distro was usually "which ones have KDE and pacman" and after that I start comparing.
Not a hot take, I keep saying the same thing in different threads. I was not able to switch to Linux for years before I understood that I have problems with Gnome not with Linux itself, tried KDE and given I was migrating from Windows it clicked immediately.
After you gain some experience, DE becomes mostly irrelevant, but it is crucial for starting off in an unfamiliar environment.
I started with Ubuntu and slowly tried getting used to Gnome over the course of a few months (mainly using windows, every now and then hopping into Ubuntu when not gaming). I learned of KDE, tried it in Kubuntu, and it all instantly clicked for me. I switched over in about a week and haven't had much reason to boot Windows since.
It turned out that front-facing experience was incredibly important to me.
This isn't a bad take. DE is what is going to keep people from running back to windows right away, mostly. I do think it is better for people coming into Linux not to try to emulate the Windows experience. It is easier to learn when you accept it is going to be different from the start.
There's Two Main Choices:
Packages....
Choose Pacman for rolling release, bleeding edge. Pick aptitude for servers and pick RPM if you want something that 'just works'.
Desktop....
High end machines with lots of fancy features and ease of use pick a full DE. WM is good for speed and low-end hardware but harder to use.
I think that SteamOS is a great place to start people off with Linux.
edit: I mean if you plug a steam deck into mouse and keyboard and use it as a linux box.
it has the support of another company hiding as "games" and can WINE pretty easy with Steam controlling the WINE.
So Arch with KDE
Cinnamon is epic dekstop environment
Agreed. I used to be the tech support for my family members. Everyone I switched to Mint Cinnamon stopped calling me. (That's also when I realised my relatives never call me to share good news or to ask about me.)
Start installing malware on their machines that reminds them to call every once in a while.
I 100% agree! Am a pretty new user of Nobara as a daily driver, switched like a month ago (I did have extensive CLI experience with Linux servers, along with Kali VM for work), and I've only realized what DE actually is only a week ago, because no one mentioned how important choice it is - it was usually just a note, that wasn't given enough importance.
So please, if you're ever recommending any linux distro to somenone who's asking, please include a short paragraph about what DE is and how importnant choice it actually is, and that they should not ignore it. I hated Gnome, and KDE feels so much better (only found about it when reinstalling broken first Fedora install to Nobara), but I didn't know I can switch or that there was that choice in the first place - I though KDE vs Gome is a back-end thing, similar to X11 vs Wayland. It's not, but people don't usually explain it when recommending distributions.
I’m a noob using the default Ubuntu DE for a few months now and I’ve gotten used to it, at this point I’m afraid to ask what are the other DEs and whether I should swap over
It's like learning how to interact with Lemmy, and then deciding which app you want to use to interact with it.
I use xfce btw
And for new users choosing a distro with big user base (thus having a better support system) should be a top priority. Instead newbies are often advised to use an obscure distro that in theory might be a good fit, but isn't. Probably those who do the recommendations are Linux testers (using VZ) rather than Linux users and mostly evaluate a distro based on install process and out of the box usage.
Configuring a big distro to your needs is much better than choosing a nishe distro.
Hint: :q!
Sister communities:
Community rules (click to expand)
1. Follow the site-wide rules
sudo in Windows.Please report posts and comments that break these rules!
Important: never execute code or follow advice that you don't understand or can't verify, especially here. The word of the day is credibility. This is a meme community -- even the most helpful comments might just be shitposts that can damage your system. Be aware, be smart, don't fork-bomb your computer.