Simply tell me which is better for me
How the hell do I make a choice?
Falling into your wing while paragliding is called 'gift wrapping' and turns you into a dirt torpedo pic.twitter.com/oQFKsVISkI
— Mental Videos (@MentalVids) March 15, 2023
Simply tell me which is better for me
Falling into your wing while paragliding is called 'gift wrapping' and turns you into a dirt torpedo pic.twitter.com/oQFKsVISkI
— Mental Videos (@MentalVids) March 15, 2023
Linux Mint is the only distro that matters
arguably
I have been doing some front end on win11 and this is first time migrating to Linux. Also I like to have a cool looking desktop
If it's your first time, go with Mint or PopOS
Don't listen to this guy unless you're just gonna web browse
>popOS
Stop trolling OP. Stop telling people to use a meme distro that breaks more than Arch.
You will most likely install a DE too (go with KDE Plasma) so there are not too many differences. Some distros have regular update schedules while others are rolling release ones. Also different package managers, ergo different amounts of packages. I say go with Arch. It's rolling release but stable for me and it's piss easy to install with Archinstall. It installs the GPU driver too, so it's good for gayming. It's one of the mainstream ones, so many packages and AUR install scripts.
fork of a fork, fuck off
IT JUST WERKS
fuck you tinkertranny
>shilling a fork of a fork
>calling anyone else a tinkertranny
when upstream inevitably shafts your useless leech distro you'll understand why that anon was right.
8WWKKK (Trips of racism)
>Linux Mint is the only distro that matters
based.
Out of those 3, Arch.
Though Debian is good. What will you use your machine for?
What's your use case?
Arch. tpbp. /thread
I used to really like Debian (testing), but then suddenly I simply couldn't install Steam anymore due to broken dependencies.
Moved to Arch and so far, it's a 10/10 experience.
Everything just works, and the AUR is great.
I can't comment much on Fedora, but the only time I tried it it felt like a buggier, cheaper and more bloated version of Ubuntu. I hated it.
people here often say "Debian for servers, Arch for Desktop" and I agree.
>people here often say "Debian for servers, Arch for Desktop" and I agree
I've never seen anyone say that here but it makes sense. I've put Arch on servers but the need for constant updates makes it impractical.
>Debian for servers, Arch for Desktop
this is what i do, and it works fucking great
777 trips speak holy truth
If you want to learn linux then go with arch for its wiki. If you want to just werk then either debian for fedora works. Fedora is more up to date but debian has a longer support cycle.
Wow I think this best summery of all three I have read, I think i will go with Debian stable and just rice it a bit thanks
That's a stupid meme for desktop use. You can do it, but it's a lot more work than using unstable (or Arch). You will want up-to-date packages, you will need to use backports, and it's easy to fuck things up.
Best distro for gayming?
Windows
kys seething wintard
Been using linux on my main machine for 3 years. It sucks for gaming and there's no way around it. Less performance and terrible anti cheat support.
yeah but most of the games can only be played on windows.
Use Arch, massive community and it has actual future. Arch or just install Windows.
Take into account the fact that I'm a total noob in Linux and have read that Arch is pretty advanced. Concerning windows, I don't want to go back to that
its not that complicated anymore since there is archinstall script which can hand you full deskop that just works
And if you run into any problem then quick google search will be enough
manjaro is arch for noobs, basically popOS/mint tier but based on arch
yes but manjaro likes to shit itself every now and then and its devs are retarded
>Concerning windows, I don't want to go back to that
Def not W11 m8.
people will recommend archinstall but honestly just do the manual install, you learn a ton and by the end of it you should have a good enough understanding to fix things that break
or just use an os like debian/ubuntu/fedora that don't easily break lol
I cannot understand why windows normies who have never even touched a unix-like os before insist on installing arch other than the fact they want to belong to some autistic online ingroup. What reason do they even have to have opinions on Linux-based operating systems?
Artix with LARBS. It’ll show you how powerful Linux is then you can decide where to go from there.
Fedora will install and work just fine if you're just developing. It's software development oriented and supports modern hardware better than the other distros.
very strong vote to avoid arch, especially if you are a newbie. people love it on this forum because they're autistic.
if your hardware is older, debian can be a good second choice if fedora doesn't install for some reason, but it's unlikely that will happen.
>if your hardware is older, debian can be a good second choice if fedora doesn't install for some reason, but it's unlikely that will happen.
it's not that stable distros are more likely to work on older hardware, it's that they're less likely to work on new hardware.
retard
retard
retard
For you? Windows
Just go for arch + kde
how about you Kd kill yourself
I'm thoroughly convinced that these diaper memes were actually made as a counter-psyop to all of the footfag memes. As such KDE and GNOME to the average retard who would fall for both of these mind tricks would be Diaper fetish vs Foot fetish.
Maybe even Rajesh Prakti from Microsoft made these memes permeate as a means of sabotaging FOSS, although GNOME does a good job of that with their feature lack and KDE does a good job of that with their bugs.
Nice try gnome shill
Simple in fact. Do you not want to updoot daily? Use Debian. Do you like taking goyslop? Use Fedora. Otherwise use Arch.
>Do you not want to updoot daily?
I would say regularly instead of daily.
I can say with confidence that Arch doesn't need to be updated more than once a week.
I wouldn't advice that because I may have been lucky, but I let some laptops without updates during 4 or 5 months several times and I never had a problem.
https://distrochooser.de/
Do your own homework.
>recommends mint (a debian distro) for gaming
>no SteamOS
kek
You don't.
You skip from one to the next every few months.
This is the truth.
But if you're a n00b debian is probably a bit easier than Arch. Arch has better documentation though.
No matter which distro someone uses, they use the Arch wiki because of how good it is. So maybe just choose Arch.
I'm planning on getting an offline copy of the arch wiki from kiwix.
reddit typing go back to r/linuxporn
Arch is the better of the three you listed for desktop. The best is of course Ubuntu.
I would recommend running Arch for a while, and then jumping to Ubuntu if / when you need an LTS for stability.
>do i beta test for red hat, run packages that are literally YEARS out of date, or play roulette with mom canceling my meetings on a weekly basis?
tumbleweed is your answer
>tumbleweed
GeckoLinux is especially nice.
>How the hell do I make a choice?
what I did was to masturbate over a photo of Julian Clary, but the photo had the names of various distro's on it, and whichever most of my cum landed on is the one I chose. In my case it was Debian
Masturbation is bad for your brain.
arch if you wanna have a human desktop experience
>fedora
install risios
>debian
install spiral linux
>arch
install endeavouros
you're welcome
>risios
fedora for retards
>spiral
made by a retard who can't into man pages, bloated as shit
>endeavouros
ugly
They're all literally the same.
not for a new user
Windows + WSL (GNOME Ubuntu Edition)
BTFO you fucking gaymer
debian or ubuntu
I've used all 3 for a good amount of time. Just go with Arch. If I want something new or obscure or non-libre it's possible to do on Arch. For desktop systems I think that's preferable.
Gentoo > Arch > Mint > Most other distros
If you're a total noob and want something easy, just go with Linux Mint. It's very popular and easy to use. You can always install something harder later.
If you don't mind a bit of learning and tinkering, the choice between Debian and Arch will depend mostly on your approach to software versions.
Are you tired of software having constant changes that are usually just pointless UI reshuffling? Do you want to install a set of program versions that are known to work well and only update every year or two, even if that means you'll also get new features later? Install Debian stable.
Do you want the latest release of everything, even if it sometimes causes your system to break because it wasn't tested as thoroughly? Will you be able to fix shit from the terminal? Install Arch.
Kubuntu is all you need.
for me its windows 10 and macos
was fun to tinker with arch for 2 years but windows and mac are just often the same result without the extra effort what has to be done with arch , might try fedora or something else with gnome later since i dont need any os specific programs
I've used both for years.
W11 and MacOS file scanning is forcing me to replan my future OS usage.
They're all fine, but Arch is great if we're talking easy just werks desktop use
Not one of the three you posted.
1. Opensuse
2. Mint or Kubuntu
3. Ubuntu
Maybe Slackware
Debloated Windows 10 LTSC 21H2,
how do i install it?
Debian is the universal distro so it works for most scenarios. It's recommended to stay on the stable branch unless you're absolutely sure what you're doing. Debian stable is the most stable thing in the known universe and they even use it in space.
https://www.computerweekly.com/blog/Open-Source-Insider/International-Space-Station-adopts-Debian-Linux-drops-Windows-Red-Hat-into-airlock
Fedora is pretty good for workstation use and why not for casual use as well. It works as a testing ground for Red Hat which is the biggest name in professional Linux.
Arch is not really for servers or workstations, you only want it for bleeding edge casual use. For that it's still decent but very barebones, you'll have to do work to get it right but it won't prevent you from doing anything.
Then there's openSUSE Tumbleweed which is awesome for many things and it has new packages while being stable and reliable. I like all those distros but openSUSE is my new favorite.
>Fedora
IBM alphatesting, gnome homosexualry
>Debian
Outdated packages
>Arch
Will break sooner or later
Take the openSUSE + KDE pill and stop distrohopping forever
>>Arch
>Will break sooner or later
Skill issue, just read news. Or install snapper if you are so paranoid
>just read news.
Sorry i got better things to do that babysit my OS
>Or install snapper if you are so paranoid
Preinstalled and configured with Opensuse 🙂
Tumbleweed also tends to get updates faster than Arch more often than not. The only small advantage Arch has is that AUR has more apps than OBS but it's not really important as there's always an RPM or Flatpak anyway
debian do update the packages but with fixes and security patches. It just will not go from 2.0 to 3.4 out of nowhere because it will introduce bugs.
that being said, SUSE does have outdated shit without any reason
arch doesn't break, you MIGHT find a nasty bug that will often get fixed fast, that's why debian makes sense
>SUSE does have outdated shit without any reason
Only Leap which is getting discontinued in the next few years
You didnt mention your usecase.
If you use any other distro besides Arch then you have NO fucking business being on this board and should see yourself out. There's plenty of other sites for people who want to use trash distros.
What's the point in using a distro that isn't ubuntu based? Whenever I go to install software, it's obvious the ubuntu version has highest priority.
install gentoo
arch + xanmod
> fedora
You LOVE SÖY (systemd everything, gnome, flatpak), and you don't care about compatibility. You want bleeding edge packages.
> debian
You absolutely crave compatibility, but you need a small install size or you want a server and can't run alpine for one reason or orther (systemd, glibc)
> arch
You want bleeding edge packages but not gnome, nor flatpak. Either compatibility doesn't matter, or you want an exotic grafted distro with several packaging formats at once.
> I don't know and I want a desktop. I have an intel/amd gpu
Linux mint
> i want an nvidia desktop
Pop os with precompiled nvidia kernel
> i want a server
Alpine, install docker then docker-compose up /podman your payload
What if i want to play the newest video games?
Windows
This but Kubuntu
Lets say for the example that you must pick a Linux distro.
SteamOS :^)
Just use Windows 11 retard, Microsoft knows best. Linux is for fat nerds and fags.
Don't fall for the memes, just use Ubuntu.
Debian for servers and obarun for everything else.
Fedora because it's more stable and if you really need anything from the aur you can just use distrobox.
Opensuse Tumbleweed makes all other distros superfluous
debian: old and stable
arch: new and unstable
fedora: new and stable
Arch, if you don't mind updating every two seconds (you have a very good internet connection)
Fedora, if you want something that is fairly stable and not too ancient
Didn't touch Debian
Arch is the best if you can keep it together, because pretty much any package you might want to install you will have a direct or semi-direct way to get it and integrate it with your package manager (no need to deal with GitHub/GitLab shit and dependancies)
I have 500mb download average when I update once a week. I know amerilards struggle with their internet, but it can't be that bad, can it?
I am from the Middle East, and yes, it can be that bad, probably even worse.
Fedora Rawhide if you have a new system.
literally why?
arch linux just werks ive been using it for over 5 years
>scared of decisions
avoid arch
>likes being dictated to
prefer fedora
I use Arch for the sole reason that it is the most up to date. If it breaks I fix it. I'm not a total retard.
Arch is really good, but it's not my first choice for people new to linux.
Gnome shill has to pretend to be a diaper fag to get people to hate kde lmao
If you're the kind of person who first tries to solve their issue by searching wikis/googling before asking other people, then Arch (combined with the ArchWiki which has specialized entries for pretty much everything you should need) is the perfect distro.
Debian only if you don't mind working with extremely outdated packages (something which is typically only useful for servers)
Fedora for all other use cases.
Literally just use Ubuntu unless you're an autist with who wants to share ricer screencshots to LULZ because it's the only place you will receive validation in your otherwise failure of a life.
if ubuntu worked for terry it works for me
Arch with KDE is better
Fedora with GNOME is also better
Fedora. Debian is too ancient and complicated with its repos, Ubuntu is a bloat and spyware. Arch is unstable.
install nixOS
Just install void, it literally ended my distrohopping.
Arch + KDE (X11) is the best desktop by miles.
Having the "stock" versions of software is nice. I really hate Ubuntu, Debian and openSUSEs preconfiguration of everything.
Arch gives you:
>full packages (no splitting is nice when you are not running a server that needs to be as efficient as possible)
>rolling release (is nice for desktop)
>packages straight from upstream that aren't modified and patched by packagers
>focus on x86
>minimal install
>nice package manager
>useful community, arch linux forum usually has the answers you need if there ever should be an issue
Don't use the AUR, just use flatpaks if you need. People who have issues with arch are people who use AUR and don't update for ages.
Read the news, update regularly, don't use AUR, and you will be golden
purchase a mac