I 100% agree! Am a pretty new user of Nobara as a daily driver, switched like a month ago (I did have extensive CLI experience with Linux servers, along with Kali VM for work), and I've only realized what DE actually is only a week ago, because no one mentioned how important choice it is - it was usually just a note, that wasn't given enough importance.
So please, if you're ever recommending any linux distro to somenone who's asking, please include a short paragraph about what DE is and how importnant choice it actually is, and that they should not ignore it. I hated Gnome, and KDE feels so much better (only found about it when reinstalling broken first Fedora install to Nobara), but I didn't know I can switch or that there was that choice in the first place - I though KDE vs Gome is a back-end thing, similar to X11 vs Wayland. It's not, but people don't usually explain it when recommending distributions.
Disagree on picking RPM distros for an absolute beginner (this is what the image is about at least). SUSE maybe but you don't want a newbie having to deal with US patent bullshit and especially SELinux. Similarly, no newbie will ever pic a barebones WM as a first time user.
I have used Fedora for nearly all the time I've daily driven Linux, and haven't encountered any problem that a newbie would encounter and couldn't overcome, excluding distro-agnostic stuff. Yeah, the h264 shit sucks, but if you use flatpaks you shouldn't have to worry about it. And if you ever have to face SELinux, then you're probably doing something that's beyond beginner level.
It's a very rough guide I threw together. There's all sorts of wedge cases you could use to argue against it. E.g. you could use RPMs on slack Linux. Not exactly user friendly.
Bit on the whole fedora or Suse do the job.
Also desktops are better for newbies. I thought I'd mentioned that but yeah I agree deffo better for newbies while WM managers more for tinkerers/power users.
Same. I remember getting interested in Linux in like 1997 or so, and it seemed like RedHat was preferred for newbies.
Of course, what were the alternatives then? It was basically Slackware (or Suse), Debian, and RedHat (or Caldera). There was no RHEL or Canonical or SElinux back then. It was a different time.
Hell one of the language packs for installing RedHat was “Redneck”. It was a gimmick to demonstrate localization options.
I started on CentOS and don't remember any issues but that was a long time ago. I flirted with Suse, Ubuntu, and Arch when RH started being a super dick. I finally settled on Rocky, rpm is the devil I know.
Most new Linux users if not all, are unable to make an educated decision on package management. The UI that they think they will like better would be more important.
So for gaming.... Pacman? I thought mint and kubuntu use aptitude, and was under the impression those are two of the better gaming distros.
I hate windows, but am sick of trying Linux every 5-6 years and finding out that I cannot get half the games I play to work. Admittedly, with you guys I might not be going it alone this time.....
I'd say, just use Ubuntu if gaming is your main concern.
Imo the main problem for games are 1. hardware drivers (afaik only if you have brand new hardware), 2. game launchers (fuck those fucking game launchers, fuck; except steam) and 3. anti- cheat software.
Otherwise gaming is really good under Linux nowadays.
The package manager is usually tied to the distro, but the point above is to let the package manager inform your distro choice.
You'll notice a running theme in my lecture here is "choice." You can switch Desktop Environment and other stuff on just about any distro and make it feel like yours. Switching package managers isn't recommended though! 😅
So for instance, Arch (btw lol), or Manjaro, or Endeavour use Pacman.
I've switched to Endeavour recently which is essentially "User-friendly Arch-based" with an installer and stuff, and it's absolutely lovely for games. My old 960M laptop runs plenty of stuff great. :D
On my main rig I've used OpenSUSE Tumbleweed for years, which is also a rolling release (constantly updated) distro that technically uses RPMs, but uses its own package manager called Zypper, which I find mostly user friendly.
Packages are also a bit more thoroughly tested.
Both use KDE Plasma desktop environment and it's gorgeous.
Alternatively, especially for laptops with hybrid Nvidia graphics, POP!_OS is alright if you're okay with GNOME desktop environment. (You can always change, but it's geared toward GNOME). It used Aptitude, and the updates trail behind a bit, but generally that's supposed to make a more stable system.
(Note that when I say "lags behind", latest security fixes tend to be backported, but you won't see fancy new shiny features as fast.)
For gaming specifically though:
Win10 is gonna be my last Windows. 11 is invasive and opinionated, and 12 is gonna have a forced Ai fetish. Gross.
Good news: Steam games work wonderfully. Thanks to advances with Proton and all their support for the SteamDeck (which runs Linux btw!)
For other platforms, look into Heroic Launcher, which takes a lot of the headache out of managing stuff like GOG games. :)
With rolling releases you usually want to update cautiously and check news updates and stuff, because newer versions aren't as thoroughly tested and some stuff might break...but you get new features faster so that's fun.
That being said:
If you're willing to learn a little as you go, OpenSUSE Tumbleweed is a big win in my book for getting the latest fun stuff while still being stable! It's also thoroughly security-minded.
And by default, it includes "Snapper" set up for you, so you can just roll the system back to a working version in the rare case something goes wrong.
You can install snapper on any distro, but it comes pre-configured and ready to go, as long as you use the default "BTRFS" file system.
I won't get into filesystems because hoo boi...but TL;DR: BTRFS allows "snapshots" and rollbacks that don't require literally doubling your disk space for rolling back, so it's a great safety net.
That being said: ALWAYS have more than one backup, in multiple locations, of anything you find important!
Good luck and have fun. I will say, Endeavour, OpenSUSE, and Pop_OS all have great communities that are eager to help if you're eager to learn! :)
Debian-based systems (including Ubuntu and its forks such as Mint) uses dpkg and APT (APT does all the communicating with repositories, dependency managment etc, dpkg actually installs and removes packages.) Aptitude is a TUI front-end for APT that gives you a menu-based system in the terminal. Synaptic (not to be confused with the trackpad driver) is a GUI front-end for APT.
I game on Linux Mint. Now it might be my tendency to play single player and/or cooperative multiplayer (think Stardew Valley or Unrailed!) games often made by smaller studios and indie developers as most of the AAA space has otherwise offended me, but...I don't really have a problem. The vast majority of things just install and run from Steam.
Started using Debian because I only used it for servers to begin with. Learned APT and never dared to learn anything else. So now I just stick with any distro using APT and a DE I like.
Both are important. I can't tell you how many times I've had to resort to containers, VMs, or compiling from source, just because some application decided to only provide packages for Arch or Debian.
not really, compare installing something like Spotify on Ubuntu vs something Arch Based, something that allows you to access AUR packages with a few simple clicks.
I can't imagine that there is any overlap between Linux users and Spotify users, considering what a shitty piece of software Spotify is. I think you must be the only one.
many people use linux because they dont like windows and still use proprietary software like spotify, discord and steam (mostly steam, just because of how good it is)
Both made possible by librespot. Not only do some Linux users use Spotify, some great open-source devs have worked to make clients for it. I honestly prefer Spotify-qt to the official one.
the DE is more important. yes, arch has more options than ububtu, but as long as the new person chooses anything that allows using flatpaks (like mint and anything that isnt from canonical), theyll have an easier and better experience since they would already get the DE they want preinstalled and flatpak would help with any proprietary software they want that isnt on the main distro's repos
I started with Ubuntu and slowly tried getting used to Gnome over the course of a few months (mainly using windows, every now and then hopping into Ubuntu when not gaming). I learned of KDE, tried it in Kubuntu, and it all instantly clicked for me. I switched over in about a week and haven't had much reason to boot Windows since.
It turned out that front-facing experience was incredibly important to me.
Got Ubuntu because all I wanted was to play/mod games and watch videos..... and Windows 10 totally shit the bed. Constantly on the green loading screens.
I'm so lost with installing, directories, hidden directories, learning how to uninstall things I can't find in directories I can't find. It's a massive headache and steep learning curve.
Still haven't really played a game yet that can't run on Ubuntu natively, and it's still better than Windows 10.
Ubuntu is VERY heavily invested in snaps at a very basic level. I think the recommendation is to not mix snaps and Flatpaks as they may not interact well. As a new Ubuntu user, I'm slowly discovering some of the random problems with snaps.
For example, just the other day, I was trying to configure my fish shell using the html-based fish_configure utility, but it just wouldn't work. Of course, I assumed the problem was with my fish install. After a couple hours fiddling with it, I finally came across a stack exchange comment indicating that the snap version of Firefox simply can't access the /tmp/ directory, which is where fish_config creates its html configuration page. WTF? Also, you can't even install a non-snap version of Firefox via apt because the official apt repository just links back to the snap version! I finally installed an apt-based version of librewolf, but had to get it from a non-Ubuntu repository, and then magically I could access to fish_config html page. That's a pretty long workaround just to view a simple HTML page!
So, if snaps have problems like this just interacting with the base Linux file system, I wouldn't be surprised if random weird behavior cropped up when trying to use Flatpaks.
I agree - was switching to Fedora about month and a half ago, and only learned about KDE vs Gnome like a week ago, when I was reinstaling to Nobara to fix some NVIDIA issues.
I did hear terms like KDE or Gnome thrown around, but never really realized that it's actually and important choice. And once you add X11 vs Wayland to the mix, it's suddenly so confusing I just subconsciously choose to ignore that choice and went with whatever the OS installed for me. I though that DE chouse is similar to X11 vs Wayland choice, i.e something tha is more about back-end than front-end, and didn't realize that's literally how your OS UI looks and controls, instead of how it works in the background (which I now know is what X11 vs Wayland is actually about)
Turned out I really don't like Gnome (Which was default for Fedora), but love KDE, which was thankfully a default for Nobara.
So, if you're ever recommending Linux to someone, be it in a comment or somwhere else, or someone is asking for a recommended distro, please include a short paragraph about the importance of choosing the correct DE, and explanation of what it is and that you can change it!
PopOS is great! I have used a few other (but never strayed far from APT), and I also did some light reading when doing my final decision . PopOS was the best fit for and easy-to-use OS without Snaps. Linux is great and all with how much control you have, but I want as little maintenance as possible for my daily driver.
Yeah that's all I need - I'm super into everyone else hyper customizing what they use, I love seeing everything that can be done, but I just need something that works and pop_os is it, and as I've said before, my games run better on pip_os than they ever did on win 10/11
Linux users fall into three categories. People who want stability over everything else, people who want everything to be bleeding edge, and people who don't use desktop environments.
The most important thing for a new user is understand which of those three they are.
I'll be honest, unless you have been using Linux for...a long time, of your job requires you to manage servers, your probably not that last category.
If you enrolled in the windows insider/test doohickey then you might want look into the rolling release distros. If not, something with a standard release cadence will be better.
I my self? All of the servers I manage have no desktop environment (core infrastructure does not need graphics). But if I am on a workstation? LMDE - Because I care about the graphics getting out of my way so I can do my job.
I’m a noob using the default Ubuntu DE for a few months now and I’ve gotten used to it, at this point I’m afraid to ask what are the other DEs and whether I should swap over
I particularly like Cinnamon, it's very simple and nothing fancy (while still looking great and modern).
The other popular choices include:
Gnome
KDE (customizable to hell)
XFCE (very easy on resources, good for old hardware, or if you like simplistic DE)
LXDE (similar to XFCE in the resources department, but looks more modern, IMO)
There are others, but I can't speak for them as I've never tried them. I can't really describe modern Gnome as well, because the last version I used was 3 and it doesn't look at all as the same DE, so someone else will have to provide that info.
modern gnome is simpler to learn and more polished than basically all other DEs. i think its better for someone that wants something new and for people who just started using a computer, because of just how easy it is to use. its not good if youre switching from windows or mac and want something similar.
You can use the list there to look up images or videos of the DEs
If you think you’d prefer one then you can try it but you aren’t likely to find an advantage over what you’re used to (there are some like old hardware wanting lighter weight) it’s mostly preference.
If you changed your Window Manager to i3 then you would probably hate it just for being so different
Don't. It's a trap. Most of them have compatibility issues with software. Stock Ubuntu is the benchmark for every piece of software these days. Deviating is fun until it isn't.
Unless you want to go a non Debian based distro, always pick Ubuntu.
Tried switching to KDE Plasma and then OpenCV broke because of outdated QT version or some shit. Same with another distro. And I couldn't install two versions at the same time.
Fair, that reply above is not helpful at all. I mean yeah, I have had my fair share of dependence hell as well. Mostly when trying to install an external deb package. I know how to prevent it nowadays but it ain’t user friendly at all.
Also I would be hesitant to use Linux as a workstation. If I had the luxury of time I would for ideological reasons alone. But I don’t have that kind of time. Troubleshooting can become costly when you get paid by the hour.
Depends on what you do, most of the deep-learning world and scientific computing is based on Ubuntu. And not just Ubuntu but currently 22.04. Even upgrading the distro can bring compatibility conflicts.
I have a massive hate boner for development on Windows for things such as the \ in the paths and needing to install a 10gig IDE to do cpp development. Or they tell you WSL "just works" while it doesn't "just work" because it can't cv2.imshow your images because there's no X11 passthrough etc.
…for nothing this days. The only people using Ubuntu now are dinosaurs and system managers running cheap servers or locked into Canonical's ecosystem, and the latter are using headless servers, remotely managed, not the DE. Variety is the spice of life. All mainstream DEs are perfectly serviceable, 100% compatible with everything and completely stable and reliable. FFS, Ubuntu's snaps don't even work well on their own DE. Stop fearmongering for Canonical, let people live life.
You do you. Just stop wasting other people's time with this worthless false hope. What I'm saying here is what I would have liked people to tell me before I wasted my time troubleshooting issues caused by custom Desktop Environments. What's next you're going to tell me Wayland already runs without issues too?
The stock Ubuntu environment looks pretty decent to begin with.
Wow, you really are aggressive and hostile for no reason. You can use Ubuntu all you want. But don't go around spreading lies just because you are too cognitively challenged to change your DE without breaking the OS. Most people are fine making a fresh install with the DE they want to try preinstalled and it works fine 100% out of the box. It's trying to make two different DE live on the same system at the same time that is only partially supported and thoroughly discouraged by every single DE developer. Most of the time installing a new DE on a system and uninstalling the old one is a pretty straightforward, although dirty process. Guess who is particularly bad and incompatible with that process? Ubuntu. It has the worst support for alternative DEs, because Ubuntu is not the benchmark for squat shit anymore. Use a real end user distro, and you'll be able to change DE to your heart's content without issue.
Because advice like this is an enormous waste of time. Calling people dinosaurs for using Ubuntu instead of KDE is a pretty out there take. The only more modern option is arch based distros like Manjaro but since every programming tutorial assumes you have APT and are running Ubuntu I don't see much of a reason to deviate from that.
it seems you should be using debian or distros based on it. ubuntu, as far as i know, uses apt as a mirror to snap, so as long as the tutorials youre following letter for letter arent too recent, you really should be using debian for actual apt packages, since ubuntu used those a couple of years ago.
you can also use fedora or arch, but it seems you dont want to check what package youre downloading at all, and just want to follow tutorials blindly.
No it installs and uninstalls a ton of packages and often relies on specific versions of certain packages. This is like saying Ubuntu isn't different from Debian.
Some DE's even use Wayland which will break a ton of software such as OpenCV.
Dude...I build my desktops from a bare Debian text only terminal by installing it piece by piece and only what I need. This current install has bee running fine for three years and I have no issues installing and configuring anything you can on Ubuntu.
This is a skill issue on your part, not an OS issue. At a certain point, if you've been using it enough, the distro literally doesn't matter anymore. Linux is Linux is Linux.
I'm only on Linux for a few months (as a daily driver, always used headless servers before that), and I'm almost certain that my Fedora install came with both KDE and Gnome in Wayland and X11 flavors pre-installed out of the box, and I could just choose between them at login screen. Or am I wrong, and I do I just not remmeber installing the other manually? I mean, that's also possible, it's been a while.
Ubuntu is shit. It used to only be shit under the hood if you were an enterprise sysadmin building your own packages and managing versioned repos for thousand machine fleets, but now it is shit from a user experience, too. Fuck snaps, fuck walled gardens, and fuck vendors attempting lock-in.
That's not usually the problem. Usually you can generally do this on any distro, even ones that have a higher level of integration with their DE.
The problem is more likely to be issues caused by overlapping configurations and base libraries that can cause weird issues if they aren't swapped out or kept default. If they aren't default and are managed by the package manager, usually the package manager will mark it as modified and often won't touch it unless you purge the configurations. Some will ask and some will straight up nuke em.
To me the problem is actually removing the old one. You can easily uninstall gnome, but it will leave behind config files and various data. It's less clean.
Also, there's an overlap in the libraries required by DEs, so you should use the "replace" option in you package manager (if it has one) to let o t figure out the best way to uninstall one and install the other.
Is it just me or is every new distro just a base with a different DE? I started to notice this a few years back but not sure if it was my imagination or something developers starting doing because it was easier to ship the DE as "the OS" than it was to instruct users on how to switch to their DE.
Yeah, that's pretty much it. Distros used to be about experimenting with different packaging systems and system managers, but now seems like the packaging systems are mostly the three: Arch, Debian, Red Hat. And the system manager is almost always systemd.
So the only thing to do (beyond better quality control, which takes a lot of constant work) is to make the DE somehow unique.
Repositories and package versioning are also extremely important in ways newbies don't realize yet. There's a significant variety between using Debian, Ubuntu, Pop!_OS or Kali. They are all Debian based using apt but they are all decidedly entirely different systems with completely different purposes and uses.
My problem with Gnome is if it were my desktop, I might as well run Windows, since Gnome shell/mutter is slightly less capable than Windows. Extensions exist, but are very much a second class citizen and get broken by shell versions frequently, and the author of an extension may be gone when it comes time to rework it for a new version.
Plasma/kwin have pretty much everything I want in desktop/window management baked in.
I love gnome overall and it's my favorite de, but the missing features and extensions being almost mandatory for basic functions definitely are a pain.
Extensions are cool but the basics should be built in.
Nowadays fedora is a decent "boring" distribution, that finally settled into blatantly prompting to add the non free repositories you will probably want.
Ubuntu was annoying with it's little adventures in "not invented here" with mir, unity, and nowadays snap. So nice to have a modern, boring distribution.
Fedora also comes with a dozen different DEs prepackaged and installable with a single, simple command. Each user just can select and change their own desktop with a menu selection on the login screen
Yeah np. For example my dad got bogged down by all the options and features in KDE, but cinnamon was great cause it just launches apps and shows the time lol
Got it! I tend to forget that not everyone can deal with tons of options. I am this person in certain config files like synapse and telegraf. The config files are just impossibly long and getting an overview of them is impossible in my mind.
As a power user of windows I've lost faith in Ubuntu, though. Their DNS implementation alone is a disaster. So I've switched to Debian and KDE, but then I saw there is a Mint Debian Edition (LMDE) so that's probably what I would recommend if anyone asked me. I personally haven't used it yet tho as I'm enjoying KDE.
I recommend KDE as when I switch from windows I tried multiple DE and that one felt the most like windows it also had support for wallpaper engine which I really wanted!
I'm not sure if it is, but I don't see it as a hot take. And it sounds reasonable, specially when some distros offer different "flavours" out-of-the-box, and offer you the option of different DEs before you even installed it.
It's certainly not a hot take. Every "which distro should I try thread" is just a discussion of the different DEs out there. I would like to hear about different package managers. I always seem happiest with apt, and I don't know why.
Not a hot take, I keep saying the same thing in different threads. I was not able to switch to Linux for years before I understood that I have problems with Gnome not with Linux itself, tried KDE and given I was migrating from Windows it clicked immediately.
After you gain some experience, DE becomes mostly irrelevant, but it is crucial for starting off in an unfamiliar environment.
I switched back to Linux about a year ago after taking about a 10 year break, and I installed gnome without even considering another option (because it’s good enough right?)
It’s completely different than what I remember and I hate it. I want to switch to something else but that is now a “someday” project.
I remember when it had a cute footprint where the “start button” used to be. It’s so different. I should have went with xfce or something. Maybe I should try cinnamon.
Cinnamon is the most Windows like DE, even more so than default KDE Plasma. Specially since the Mint team went the extra mile to make the OS settings and configuration 100% UI based in a Windows-lite way. It's currently the perfect Linux noobie distro.
the DE is very important unless you have A LOT of free time and REALLY WANT to see something different from what youre used to.
my first distro (other than ubuntu in school computers, but we dont talk about those) was fedora server minimal install, where i installed dwm and had fun using it. i had just switched from windows and was happy to have so many options, even though i had (almost) no linux experience before. after trying most of the big DEs and distros, i ended up on arch with xfce, which i have been using for more than a year now.
most people really should go slower and try things step by step, as what i did would be really weird for anyone that tried it ...probably
