tbh ubuntu just werks
pretty decent corporate backed distro
this post was submitted on 15 Nov 2024
280 points (85.2% liked)
linuxmemes
21569 readers
670 users here now
Hint: :q!
Sister communities:
Community rules (click to expand)
1. Follow the site-wide rules
- Instance-wide TOS: https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/
- Lemmy code of conduct: https://join-lemmy.org/docs/code_of_conduct.html
2. Be civil
- Understand the difference between a joke and an insult.
- Do not harrass or attack members of the community for any reason.
- Leave remarks of "peasantry" to the PCMR community. If you dislike an OS/service/application, attack the thing you dislike, not the individuals who use it. Some people may not have a choice.
- Bigotry will not be tolerated.
- These rules are somewhat loosened when the subject is a public figure. Still, do not attack their person or incite harrassment.
3. Post Linux-related content
- Including Unix and BSD.
- Non-Linux content is acceptable as long as it makes a reference to Linux. For example, the poorly made mockery of
sudoin Windows. - No porn. Even if you watch it on a Linux machine.
4. No recent reposts
- Everybody uses Arch btw, can't quit Vim, and wants to interject for a moment. You can stop now.
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.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Anecdotal, but I have had bad experiences using Ubuntu. I know it's not a bad distro, and that it contributes a lot (especially historically), but it's the other distros that take their contributions and add to it that I find worth using or recommending, or sometimes an unrelated distro. It's the sort of thing I might give money to, but I'll never want to use directly.
I think this is what people mean when they say it's bad - that distros that take what Ubuntu made and add their own touch seem more user friendly.
If you're going to shill a corpo distro, at least shill a decent one like fedora.
Lmao. As if corporate operating systems were bad. What makes RedHat that much better tho? I want to know. From what I've seen they are both bringing a lot of value to the FOSS space.
- Fedora makes very minimal changes to downstream. The gnome experience on fedora is the experience the devs intended, for better or worse.
- It often experiments with new technologies. It was the first to ship pulseaudio out of box. And then again for pipewire. And if it wasn't the first to install wayland by default, it probably was the first to stop shipping XOrg out of box.
- It doesn't install snaps instead of native packages when you run rpm install
- It's also Linus Torvald's distro of choice if that's worth anything
-
In my humble opinion, the stock experience on Gnome sucks. No desktop icons, no dock, no minimize maximize buttons, no app indicators. I only use Gnome because of the changes Ubuntu made to it, which can be replicated on other distros with a script.
-
That's valid. Ubuntu has shipped with wayland by default since some time ago but wasn't the first one. They don't seem to adopt the latest technology as fast. Which I like. Even the new LTS still gives you the option to use X.org in GDM.
-
Also true. If you don't like Snaps and aren't comfortable with more and more packages being replaced by them, Ubuntu isn't the distro to use. I don't mind the metapackages installing snaps instead at all honestly. The terminal clearly says it's installing a snap. And from my experience they work great. I was recently using wsl and needed yt-dlp. I went for the snap right away and it worked great.
In fact the only broken snaps I have encountered so far are OBS and curl (which can't access root directories, making it useless for the script I needed)