Personally I don't really hate Ubuntu, but I tend to find that everything it does, there's something else that does it slightly better.

For example, it's supposed to be a good 'beginner' distro or good for something that 'just works', but IMO things like Mint or Pop!OS do it a little better these days. Snap is supposed to be a nice simple way to manage packages without worrying about dependencies, but Flatpak does it better and so on.

So yeah I don't hate it, I just don't see any particular reason to really use it. Opinions may vary though of course.

I've run Ubuntu Server frequently on VMs for work, but I could kinda go either way on it. The majority of people who have issues with Ubuntu have philosophical differences. I'm inclined to agree for my personal stuff (in principle I'd rather not get my packages from a single source that works on their own whims, in practice I never use anything but Flathub unless I need a package with deeper permissions) primarily because I believe that Linux should be as open as possible. That said, I already mentioned that my principles there only apply to machines I own, so I guess I'm a bit of a hypocrite 😅

Long time since I used Ubuntu,, remember updates breaking network twice.. Peppermint OS, Debian(and devuan if you don't like systemd) based. all the important bits (not arch level) but nothing more. Rolling, Runs on 1 GB ram. Haven't distro hopped anymore since I found it.

Stable base , extra on top

“Everything you need and nothing you don’t."

You don't have to use Snap (except for LXC, I think?). It's not enabled by default, but you can enable Flatpak and everything will work fine. Flatpak has Firefox and Chrome and all the other applications thst Canonical foolishly moved from their apt repos to their Snap repos.

There are some frustrating things about Snaps (loading all of them at boot time rather than at runtime, for quicker app start but slower boot, for example, and that stupid snap folder that can't be moved) but honestly I don't really see what the fuss is about as an end user. Nobody sets up a purely Snap based system anyway.

The problem with Snap is an ideological one. If you don't care who runs your software store and if you don't care about having the ability to add more software stores then the default, you'll be fine with Snap. If you're ideologically driven towards Linux, you'll probably dislike the way Snap is set up.

Like it or not, Ubuntu is still one of the best supported distros out there. If you want drivers from any manufacturer, you get to pick between drivers tested for Ubuntu or Fedora. Every other distro repackages those drivers using their own scripts and compatibility layers because nobody over at Intel is going to spend company time specifically getting Garuda to work when its customers don't sell hardware with it preinstalled.

Software like Discord and VS Code having the ".deb, maybe .rpm, or you figure it out yourself" approach of official distribution is pretty standard, I'd say, for better or for worse. It also helps that a lot of entry level Linux questions and answers online are about Ubuntu. Askubuntu may not be as vast and up to date as the Arch wiki, but at least the askubuntu people aren't going to tell you off for not knowing advanced Linux stuff.

There are upsides and downsides to any Linux distro. You're not "supposed" to think anything, try it out, keep an open mind, and pick what works for you.

I recently got a workstation class desktop for my home server and I had so many issues with Debian that I have to search an alternative, Ubuntu supported the hardware natively and I even got a firmware update. I think the hate is really unfounded. Of course there is corporate decisions, but so far it has never get in my way. I have it with a lot of docker containers and a lot hardware integrations. Even the secure boot with nvdia card is easy. I only installed virt-manager via snap, the other things were directly with apt. I did enable the live patch and that’s a nice addition to don’t need to restart a lot.

I think you should give it a try, so far it has worked for me.

If it works for you then use it, however if you want the latest packages you'll have to NOT use the LTS releases in which case be prepared to do a FULL REINSTALL every time a new version comes out.

Or use the LTS but use Snaps for those applications that you want to have the latest versions of. Snaps are getting better and I think eventually you won't notice the difference between them and native apps, except for the space they just up. But that goes for Flatpak too.

Personally I use Linux Mint Debian Edition because I'm not happy with the way Canonical is going. In most cases the "old" apps are fine for me, but if I felt need the newest version I'll use a Flatpak.

Another rolling option is OpenSuse Tumbleweed however, being a Mac which uses proprietary WiFi drivers, your WiFi will break with kernel updates, which can be irritating, unless you have ethernet.

I think a lot of people dislike Ubuntu because of Gnome and Snaps, which is weird to me. You can fairly easily change desktop environment and most Snaps have apt or Flatpak alternatives.

I'm quite happy with Linux Mint Debian Edition. I think it is the future of Mint. It's on a very recent kernel, and more and more software I use nowadays is in Flatpaks anyways. I don't feel like I'm missing out on much new stuff, but maybe I'm just not aware.

i heard all this shit about linux and nvidia

i installed Ubuntu and EVERYTHING WORKS

Is Ubuntu trying embrace, extend, exterminate?

I just realised snaps kind of look like "extend", after a long period of "embrace".

Did anyone write about it, yet? Am I overthinking it?

*buntu doesn't even deserve threads like this.

There is some stuff that I hate, but I tend to come back to it for my home server just because of livepatch, which is nice to minimize the amount of reboots necessary and having a patched kernel for all my LXCs makes then also automatically protected.

What if you just use distrobox in the future? You can use debian/ubuntu with it on whatever system you use. On my fedora silverblue installation almost everything is seperated from the OS. I barely touch the OS. It doesn't really matter if I'm on silverblue, microos or vanillaos. I want to switch to microos because it comes with firefox as a flatpak ootb and other minor things. It's jist not worth it anymore to switch the distro