Linux

Gentoo. But it took a few years

Pop os. I just couldn't use their desktop (even though I think it's good, it's just not for me)

Honestly, depending on whether you count it or not, LFS. I have not tried Gentoo yet, though I want to one day, for the learning experience, and yet I already know that compiling everything is not something I enjoy.

I can get by with OpenSUSE and Void (kinda), I've used Debian for a few weeks, I've used Fedora for a month or so, I've used Ubuntu for a bit, I've tried PopOS for a week or two, I've used NixOS for a few months, and I've used Arch for most of my time on Linux.

Currently I'm on Arch, but I don't like rolling releases that much. At the same time, I am also not a fan of immutability, as there are some programs I need that cannot be installed on an immutable distro, so that's why I'm on Arch. Why am I only using these 2? Because they are the only distros that have all the packages I need (excluding the specialist software that I need for university). By the time I discovered Distrobox (which would solve this problem), I was already on Arch. I've also done some changes to my setup and as such, I'll need to wait for some new features to make their way into program releases and into the NixOS Stable repo with the following release. Until then, I'm on Arch.

Opensuse. Did absolutely nothing wrong but I just didn't vibe with it. Went to fedora and I vibe hard with it

anything with GNOME or xfce. modern cinnamon is ok ig but KDE plasma just makes anything bearable for me

I feel like I'm a chronic distro-hopper sometimes, but no matter how many times I try, I just can't settle into OpenSUSE for whatever reason. The OBS feels a bit more of a wild west than the AUR.

Garuda. I tried it because it's supposed to be "gamer" oriented. I thought it meant it would make it easier/smoother for gaming. What they actually meant was it felt like being locked inside a gaming PC with flashing and spinning RGB lights everywhere. No fucking thanks.

Fedora. Fedora is solid, but coming from arch I felt it was lacking so much in the way of the package repos and doing things like secure boot was more effort than it was worth.

Not too ick someone's yum, and this ventures outside of Linux.

I dislike the BSDs. Great for getting pf, and not being a homogeneous shop, but just different enough to be difficult outside of one specific use case.

Gentoo was similar. It may be different now, but a pain on the Xbox.

Mint was too dumbed down and ugly.

Ubuntu is useful, but likely harmful with it's constant pushes to commercialize everything.

Redhat is needed for work, but the commercialization drives worse quality. Documentation seems purposely bad to drive training courses.

(Yes, I like Debian.)

PopOS!

It's supposed to be good for gaming, but a lot of its packages (including the video drivers) are outdated af because it's based on Ubuntu, so you may have to wait months for a mesa patch that makes a game playable while on Arch I can just install mesa-git and play.

I also don't like the Gnome interface and the fact that it casually encourages installing proprietary software, but that's not relevant given its target audience.

Yeah, I get it, it's a distro for novices so obviously it won't go all freetard on you for installing nvidia drivers, but the fact that it's so outdated is absolutely inexcusable and can drive users away because games that are marked as playable on steam may not even launch.