this post was submitted on 25 Dec 2023
243 points (95.8% liked)

Linux

48317 readers
721 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 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I've been using Linux Mint since forever. I've never felt a reason to change. But I'm interested in what persuaded others to move.

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Draconic_NEO@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 11 months ago

Ubuntu, because snaps break shit and don't work right a lot of the time, also they left people hanging with 32 bit support which isn't great (for being a Legacy OS for weak computers it's not a great look for them, or all the Linux distros that followed them).

There were a lot of problems with Fedora and CentOS, none of them as bad as Ubuntu though. Most were either instability or software availability due to lacking RPM versions of the software I needed.

Arch itself hasn't given me many problems but it is ideologically problematic for a lot of reasons (mainly the elitism) and it is also a rolling release which isn't great if you don't like being a guinea pig and getting software before all the bugs have been ironed out.

[–] Shimitar@feddit.it 9 points 11 months ago (5 children)

To all gentoo detractors.... 20 years ago compiling a browser would take 5 days (as in 24 x 5 hours...) So you are not allowed to complain TODAY about compile times ahahahaahaha ahahaha ahah haha aaaaaaaaah ಠ_ಠ

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] MiddledAgedGuy@beehaw.org 9 points 11 months ago (5 children)

Arch. Rolling release is too much maintenance and AUR can be a pain. I do like the minimalist approach though.

For those of a similar opinion and aren't familiar with it, check out Void. Also a minimalist rolling release, but aims for more stable packages so less updating. Decent package selection in their repos as well.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] oresafa@lemmy.world 9 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Ubuntu Reason : Canonical

[–] anothermember@beehaw.org 8 points 11 months ago (2 children)

One that might be controversial: OpenSUSE Tumbleweed. I still have a lot of respect for this distro and I really wanted to like it but it's just not for me. It's the fact that major updates could occur any day of the week, which could be time-consuming to install or they could change the features of the OS. It always presented a dilemma of whether to hold back updates which might include holding back critical updates.

So rolling distros aren't for me, everyone expects to run in to some occasional issues with Arch, but TW puts a lot of emphasis on testing and reliability, so I thought it might be for me. But the reality is I much prefer the release cycle and philosophy of Fedora, I think that strikes the best balance.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] GustavoM@lemmy.world 8 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

"Not exactly Linux", but FreeBSD. Gave it a couple tries but gave up when I realized its minimalism is a placebo at best and its "super security features" can (also) be achieved on any other standard Linux distribution.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] lntl@lemmy.ml 8 points 11 months ago (1 children)
[–] jcarax@beehaw.org 6 points 11 months ago

It's funny, I was really excited for Ubuntu when it first released, and actually quite enjoyed it. On the other hand, RPM distros seemed like an absolute mess, at that time. Now it's the exact opposite. At least in regards to Fedora, it's a very well thought out and maintained distro if you want things to just work, and Ubuntu makes me uncomfortable.

[–] ____@infosec.pub 8 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Alpine. It’s powerful and fills a need in a specific use case. Just not my need, nor my use case, and that’s OK.

My docker usage is mostly testing and validation that when I run the code on the actual hardware, it will work as expected. I tend to want the container to match the target environment.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] mikesailin@lemmy.ml 7 points 11 months ago (3 children)

NIXOS is definitely not for me. The documentation sucks and there are less cumbersome ways to restore a system.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] atk007@lemmy.world 7 points 11 months ago

NixOS .. loved the idea but doing configuration all the time for every little thing became too much of a headache.

[–] Lettuceeatlettuce@lemmy.ml 7 points 11 months ago

ZorinOS. I tried to install it on my spouse's computer with all modern, well-supported AMD hardware. Had nothing but problems, to the point that the computer was barely usable. WiFi broken, GUI was laggy, repositories were buggy. When I finally got the system somewhat stable, I didn't like the interface at all. Styles were bland, icons dull, everything just seemed clunky and awkward.

For a distro advertised as a beginner-friendly and pay-for-polish system, I was very dissapointed.

Might have been a fluke, I don't think my experience is standard for Zorin, but it was a really terrible first impression and I never suggest it to Linux-curious folks. Mint or Vanilla Fedora are my go-to for newbs.

[–] Grass@sh.itjust.works 7 points 11 months ago

Alpine. I actually really like it, but it just doesn't fit any of my use cases.

[–] Veticia@lemmy.ml 7 points 11 months ago

I tried arch btw.

But didn't like it.

[–] 01189998819991197253@infosec.pub 7 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

elementary os. Installed it, and noped right out of there the same day. On paper, it should be great. Maybe the execution was flawless for macfans, but it was not for me. I do appreciate how they tried to make an easy transitional Linux for macfans, though, and I do not regret the donation because of that fact.

[–] Wilzax@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Ubuntu. It's just macOS but not as polished

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] chitak166@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Fedora. Just feels like I'd be moving to the dnf ecosystem for no reason.

[–] Benaaasaaas@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago

Ubuntu, tried to install vim 8 when it released, too bad they only update major package versions once every 2 years. Find myself some random dudes repo, great it's vim 8, too bad it was compiled w/o python support... Installed Manjaro (arch based) and never looked back.

[–] WreckingBANG@lemmy.ml 6 points 11 months ago

Fedora. Dont get me wrong it is a great Distro but i did not really felt at home when using it.

[–] blotz@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago (2 children)

NixOS.

Cool package manager but constantly breaking compatibility with none nix package managers really annoyed me. (Ghcup, mason, etc...)

Also how difficult they made compiling software from source. I could live with nix packages if I could also compile the programs I need from source.

Great server os. I don't understand how people use it as a daily driver

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] callyral@pawb.social 5 points 11 months ago

Manjaro. Probably because I tried it with GNOME which isn't for me either.

[–] s0phia@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago

Any distro that uses apt. I'm ok with Fedora and Arch.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›