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.
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
Which one(s)
Arch.
why?
Edit:
Having said that, I have an eye on immutable distros. Maybe one day I'll try one out.
EndeavourOs makes it super simple too
So does archinstall.
The Arch wiki really is amazing. It's also still very useful for Linux stuff in general. The qemu page has come in handy more than a dozen times.
Yeah, I use Mint and the Arch wiki is still one of my first stops when I have an issue
Debian. Seemed like the most generic "Linux" there is. Nothing special, nothing weird. Just Linux. Gray, boring, system defaults Linux.
It's funny cause it started out as one of the most opinionated Linux distros.
I settled on openSUSE Tumbleweed because it's rolling and reliable. I chose KDE Plasma long before I chose my distro.
I am now at NixOS. I like the reproducibility and immutability of the distro, but the documentation is far from great and configuring the OS you want is not that straightforward. I also don't like that even though it has a great number of packages, they tend to be slightly outdated.
I am not sure if I will stick with it, but I really like that I can create very specialised configurations that are also portable. I am currently using KDE but I am thinking of switching to Hyprland once I get more comfortable around NixOS and home manager/flakes, as nothing beats tiling managers in my opinion.
After trying out a few distros over the last 20 years or so (~~open~~SUSE, Ubuntu, Debian, Arch, Fedora and Silverblue were the ones I actively used for a stretch of time on desktop, Debian and CentOS on server), I also landed on NixOS.
Who knows what the future brings, but things feel more settled to me than they ever have. Maybe that's because there's a (declarative) solution for every custom setup, it's just a function of time and profiency in Nix. Or maybe it's because I invested quite a bit of work into a trivially reproducible setup for most of my machines and workflows (all in one glorious version-controlled flake), that the sunk costs are too high to switch elsewhere.
I'm still willing to experiment with DEs/WMs, currently running Gnome on my main and Sway on weaker machines. Hyprland is a bit out there for my taste, but I'm really looking forward to giving Cosmic DE a try once it's ready.
I also settled on NixOS after Ubuntu -> Arch -> Debian -> Fedora -> Silverblue -> NixOS. Couldn't be happier and no plans to leave.
Fedora.
(Specifically Workstation - i.e. the Gnome variant, but I've used other spins and they're also great)
Pretty up to date, reliable, spearheads new developments that go on to benefit the Linux desktop as a whole, they don't make a bunch of crazy alterations to the DEs they ship.
And to think I was reluctant to try it for ages because the name sounds like it'd be some neckbeardy distro.
Arch. Minimal, fast, rolling and it doesn't break. Plus, the AUR and the Wiki are unvaluable.
Had been on: RedHat (199something), Mandrake, Slackware, Ubuntu and Debian before.
I want to settle on Debian Stable, I really do, but I use Hyprland, so I'll have to wait until we get Debian 13 (hopefully 13 and not 14 lol).
I learned, and learned, and learned, and every step led me to simplify, simplify, simplify.
Now, I’m a Debian man. If I didn’t install it, it probably isn’t on there, just like I like it.
Fedora atomic GNOME aka silverblue
Current Cons:
Debian. So many other distros are based on it anyway. I use it on damn near everything now.
Debian. It always works until it doesn’t and when it doesn’t there’s information at my level of understanding that allows me to correct it.
EndeavourOS.
I'm naturally a tinkerer and an avid gamer, with very recent hardware so an Arch based distro fits really nice.
It has just the right amount of pre-installed stuff. Not quite as bloaty as Manjaro or most ubuntu-based distros, but not quite as DIY as vanilla Arch. I know I can install and uninstall anything on Linux but when a distro already comes with just the right baseline for me, work smarter, not harder.
Ubuntu/Debian based distros didn't quite suit me, I love the AUR to death, I love the Arch wiki (even if a lot of it can be used just fine on other distros), I love rolling release and having the latest everything. I do use PopOS on my laptop since I use it a lot less and therefore I want to update it less often.
Only issue is when they ship dumb defaults sometimes that break my workflow but I can diagnose and undo them I guess.
Mint unironically. I've reached a point where I've got a lot of things going on in my life that I don't have the time and just need something that works and I don't need to fiddle around with much.
This makes me feel better. I had the entire intention to distro hop around but mint was the first one and it just worked lol
EndeavourOS. I like the simplicity and minimalism of stock Arch, bloated distros bother me. I have been thinking of trying out Linux Mint again though, I used it for years and it was really good.
Servers are a different story but for Desktop, OpenSUSE.
Because:
Part of my transition from Windows to Linux was that basic tasks like installing software or even the OS itself shouldn't be a high effort endeavour. I should be able to point to a package file or run a package manager and be able to go about my day without running "make" and working my way through dependency hell.
I say this as a Linux user of all different flavours for well over 15 years who has a deep love for what it brings to the table. If we want it to be common place with non-IT folks, it needs to work and it needs to be simple to use.
I settled on two.
Arch for my desktop, because there I like having an always up-to-date system with the latest drivers and libraries so that I can always try the latest versions of whatever it is I want to play with next. Pacman is also a pretty good package manager, and almost any piece of software that is not in the default repos can be found in the AUR. For the rest, I also like that Arch just gets out of your way and lets you configure your system how you want.
Debian for anything that runs unattended, like all my homelab services. It's well tested, offers feature stability, has long-enough support, and doesn't do weird things every other release like forcing snaps or netplan or cloud-init on you. Those "boring" qualities make it the perfect base to run something for a long time that doesn't scream for attention all the time.
Linux Mint: Debian Edition. Love mint's cinnamon DE, and the plus of being away from Canonical's shenanigans is great. It's been stable and my daily driver for months now.
Debian, settled down few years ago and my fallback would be Fedora.
Nice thing about Debian is, I can use it for servers, desktop and raspberry pi on am64, arm7 and aarch64. This is a real killer feature for me, because I'd rather do interesting things with my devices instead of learning n different ways to accomplish the same tasks. (e.g. using different distributions for server/desktop/pi and having to figure out 3 times the names of the same packages or where the configuration file in which version is expected.)
A mixture of NixOS and Debian, depending on the machine. NixOS is trivial to maintain and to keep predictable and tidy. When its weirdness is a problem, Debian is my answer. It doesn't get more normal than Debian.
Fedora, it just works. I've considered going back to Arch for the AUR several times, but I just don't want to deal with it at this point
Ubuntu -> Pop!_OS -> EndeavorOS
Either Debian or Fedora + flatpak & KDE. I'm familiar with both and they just work for me. Distrohopping and messing around with my computer feels like a chore more than anything else these days.
Like everyone i started on Windows.
From there -> Mint -> Ubuntu 16 -> Fedora -> Ubuntu 18 -> elementary -> Ubuntu 18 (again) -> Ubuntu 22 -> EndeavourOS
I've god damn I love EndeavourOS. Now just hop between the supported DEs instead :)
Mac OS.
Debian for my servers though.
Stopped hopping when I realized most distros are just debian with certain things pre-installed or pre-configured. Decided to compare base distros, and settled on Gentoo for its powerful features, transparency and customizability.
Debian, because it is boring, predictable, and I know how to tweak it to suit my use case
Settled on Linux Mint Debian Edition.
I just want reliability, a beautiful desktop and great support. Plus 100% community based - Debian + Cinnamon.
No corps like canonical or red hat and no heavy maintenance routine like Arch.
Up until last year I would have said Ubuntu. It was qualitatively the best desktop choice when I started with it in the aughts, and is still one of the few distros that has a reasonable out of the box install option with LVM. But I recently tried a Silverblue variant and NixOS, and I like what I see. Once I'm comfortable enough I will switch, I'm tired of the ensnapification and the Pro nag screens.
Ensnapification is hilarious lmao
I think GNU Guix System scratches all my itches:
guix shell as its interpreter listing all the packages it requires).Previously I used Ubuntu from 2008 to 2009, Trisquel from 2009 to 2014, and Debian from 2014 to 2019.
I switched to guix and haven't looked back.
Mostly because:
Guix is the smoothest time I've ever built packages for a distro before (well outside arch). Which is good because there's a lot of out of date and unadded packages for potential.
Debian. I've been using Linux since 1999, and I've tried everything under the sun. Back then, I was a Red Hat person, then an ubuntu person mostly, but Debian is where there's stability that doesn't mess with your mental health. It just works, and that has more value than being pretty or having the latest bells and whistles.
Linux Mint, I wanted Manjaro with KDE to work so much. But the issue I had with it, and no not the in general complaints about Manjaro, was how annoying it is to set up again. Rebuilding a machine or an install was just such a hassle, that I wanted to move to a Ubuntu/Debain based distro, where everything was already made for it.
If my current build of Linux Mint dies, then I'd probably move to the Mint DE and remove the Ubuntu part.
Troubleshooting is easier, finding apps is easier, and outside of advance user packages like MangoHud and XPadNeo where I needed to build from source (not fun). It's been a painless experience.
OpenSuse (back then the "normal" one, then Leap and now the rolling release Tumbleweed). It just works really well and keeps on trucking. Updated my old machine for ten years through all the openSuse releases without reinstalling. The repositories are very well kept in order and the build service easily provides anything I might find lacking.
Also, I quite like using Yast for system administration. There are many areas that I rarely touch and having a GUI available is super helpful.
I think I'll settle down with Void + XFCE
I've only hopped from Ubuntu to Arch. I'm currently messing with debian in a vm.
Staying on Arch because I love pacman+paru
My journey was:
I left Debian for Ubuntu when it simply worked better and left Ubuntu when it became too restrictive and weird. I need a working system but my freedom to experiment. Then I discovered arch and never looked back. Still kept Debian on servers.
Currently using arch on desktop machines and nixos on my servers. But I use nix for Dev environments and dotfiles even on arch.
Not sure if I'll stay with NixOS but for now that seems like the direction I'm going to. Still love Arch Linux for it's freedom though, but I'm getting older and don't have the time to fiddle with everything.