this post was submitted on 24 Aug 2023
154 points (81.6% liked)

Linux

48323 readers
650 users here now

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.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

For me

Mint

Manjaro

Zorin

Garuda

Neon

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] halfempty@kbin.social 112 points 1 year ago (7 children)

Ubuntu is massively overrated. It's a bloated distro owned by a greedy corporation.

[–] valentino@lemmy.ml 43 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I respect a lot what they did though. Ubuntu and Fedora worked and improved a lot of Linux's new technologies. Plus their focus and model is more focused on the server side.

[–] lemillionsocks@beehaw.org 22 points 1 year ago

Yeah. Ubuntu has kind of taken a turn over the years but its still a super user friendly distro and they have done a lot to make linux more accessible for the masses. They also serve as a base for a number of other distros to build off of an as a result theyre an easy choice for a newbie to gravitate towards.

[–] panmeek@lemmy.sdf.org 28 points 1 year ago (9 children)

the snaps are terrible and they now have ads in the server version (CLI)

load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] pH3ra@lemmy.ml 66 points 1 year ago (2 children)

All of them: communities are so used to blow their own horn that every Distro becomes overrated in the public debate.
Each single distro is "fine" at best.
Except for Debian.
Debian is Great, Debian is Love.

[–] SaltyIceteaMaker@lemmy.ml 19 points 1 year ago (3 children)

And arch. Arch is godly.

(I use Arch btw.)

[–] pH3ra@lemmy.ml 17 points 1 year ago (7 children)

I'm gonna say "no", but just by personal preference.
I agree that, if you're skilled enough, 90% of distributions out there are completely useless once Arch and Debian are available.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Cpo@lemm.ee 9 points 1 year ago

Been at Ubuntu for a couple of years but I was pleasantly surprised when I went back to debian. Sticking to that one like shit on shingles.

[–] nerdschleife@lemm.ee 56 points 1 year ago (17 children)

Manjaro. It just breaks itself randomly, and performs poorly. Endeavour / ARCO Linux are more stable

load more comments (17 replies)
[–] turkalino@lemmy.yachts 42 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Arch

  • Being 64-bit doesn't make you special, my Nintendo 64 is 27 yrs old and it's 64-bit

  • Being bleeding edge doesn't make you special, all I have to do is sit on a nail and now I'm bleeding edge too

  • Rolling releases don't make you special, anyone can have those if they take a shit on a steep slope

/s (was hoping we'd be able to leave this behind on reddit, but alas, people's sense of humor...)

[–] polygon@kbin.social 18 points 1 year ago (11 children)

I know you're making a joke but I was convinced recently to try out Arch. I'm running it right now. I was told it's a DIY distro for advanced users and you really have to know what you're doing, etc etc. I had the system up and running in 20 minutes, and about an hour to copy my backup to /home and configure a few things. I coped the various pacman commands to a text file to use as a cheat sheet until muscle memory kicked in.

..and that was it. What is so advanced about Arch? It's literally the same as every other distro. "pacman -Syu" is no different from "zypper dup" in Tumbleweed. I don't get the hype. I mean it's fine. I don't have any overwhelming desire to use something else at the moment because it's annoying to change distros. It's working and everything is fine. As I would expect it to be. But people talk about Arch like its something to be proud of? I guess the relentless "arch btw" attitude made me think it would be something special.

I guess the install is hard for some people? But you just create some partitions, install a boot loader, and then an automated system installs your DE. That's DIY? You want DIY go install NixOS or Void, or hell, go OG with Slackware. Arch is way overrated. That doesn't mean it's bad, but it's just Linux and it's no different from anything else. KDE is KDE no matter who packages it.

[–] Swiggles@lemmy.blahaj.zone 14 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Arch is supposed to be used, it is a normal distribution. It is not hard, it is simple. That's its whole philosophy.

It is only difficult if you are new to Linux, because it doesn't hold your hands and has no opinion about a lot of things hence you must make many decisions yourself and configure everything like you need it. You have to know what you need and want.

The notion of a difficult distro for the sake of it is ridiculous. Who would ever want to use it? Arch is popular, because it is easy to use, but lets you configure the system to your desires for the most part.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] s20@lemmy.ml 33 points 1 year ago (6 children)

Gonna go with Manjaro. I can't, for the life of me, understand why it gets the support it does. It's not fantastic to begin with, with an apparently incompetent management team. Add in that all the theming is flat and lifeless, and I'm just confused.

I mean, any Arch derived distro with an "easy installer" kinda confuses me. Archinstall is fairly easy to use (although a bit ugly), and most other Arch based distros seem to miss what I see as the main point of Arch: getting to know and personalize your system. So things like Endeavor, Xero, etc. Don't make a lot of sense to me either. But at least they're not effectively accidentally DDOSing the AUR...

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] beyond@linkage.ds8.zone 27 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The notion of there being underrated or overrated distros is, itself, overrated. No, there should not (and cannot) be "one distro to rule them all" because different people have different needs.

Remember that in the free software community we have the freedom to modify and share everything. Those "overrated" distros exist because someone saw a need for them, and they are widely used because other people agree. If Debian was good enough for every use case why do these other distros exist? Why doesn't everyone just use Debian?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] thelinuxcast@lemm.ee 26 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I already gave mine. They're in the video.

[–] Gingernate@programming.dev 12 points 1 year ago

You're going to have to start adding your lemmy contact info in the podcast now lol

[–] LeFantome@programming.dev 25 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Ubuntu is not overrated. It probably gets more hate than it deserves just because it is so popular. That said, I hate it. Slow and opinionated ( by bad opinions ).

Manjaro because it is lipstick on a pig. Looks gorgeous, seems to offer the benefits of Arch with less pain, is total garbage.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] user8e8f87c@berlin.social 21 points 1 year ago (4 children)

@valentino NixOS – I mean it is really nice to have a declarative OS, but I don’t like its logo.

[–] jollyrogue@lemmy.ml 37 points 1 year ago

Gotta appreciate the pettiness of this. 😆

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Rogueren@discuss.tchncs.de 21 points 1 year ago

"Gaming" distros, save for Steam OS as that's for a console-like device.

Pretty much every distro can play games relatively close in performance to any other distro. The only real difference is how new your GPU drivers are.

[–] Certainity45@lemmy.ml 18 points 1 year ago

For me, every non-mainstream distro. IMO every fork which is just a rebuild .iso should ratherly be an install script and extra repos. Simply because the lack of maintenancers and userbase tends to make those projects to die or getting updates way less often tahn should. People should join any existing project rather than creating new ones.

[–] yrmyli@sopuli.xyz 17 points 1 year ago (3 children)

For me there is only two distros. They are Arch an Debian. But that is only me. I don't think that any of those distros are overreted they just have their own user types and needs.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] RagingToad@feddit.nl 16 points 1 year ago (6 children)

I'm very critical of all the immutable distrubtions - as an old timer in tech I've seen so many things come and go. I'm also curious, ofcourse, and already tried out a VM with NixOS and everything seemed fine. But I'm going to wait it out before something like that becomes my main driver, I have a job to do (development, systems, stuff) and I cannot afford to say "sorry little to no progress today, my OS needs tinkering".

(Feel free to tell me I'm wrong :-) I love to tinker with new stuff).

[–] mollusk@lemm.ee 7 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I still need to give NixOS the college try. The docs are slowly getting better but other than that I have heard great things from all over the Internet about it once you get your head around it. I failed at figuring it out on my own but the day will come where it makes sense I'm sure.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] cynetri@midwest.social 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

For all its strengths, Arch is kind of a pain in the ass to maintain. I daily drive it but I risk breaking something if I don't update regularly. My youtube laptop can't update at all anymore from something I don't care to fix (when Firefox breaks then its a big deal lmao) and my main rig needed to use the fallback initramfs for a while after I forgot to update for a while. mkinitcpio -P (I think) fixed it though

[–] chrismit3s@feddit.de 7 points 1 year ago (3 children)

What do you mean exactly? A running system shouldn't spontaneously break from not being updated. It's just that partial upgrades can break compatibility/dependencies, but running full system upgrades should be fine, as long as you pay attention to breaking changes and major version bumps. Also with timeshift it should always be possible to get back to a working state.

[–] deong@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think the main issue with Arch comes if you try to use it like Debian Stable. Like, if you don't run pacman -Syu for a year, you probably won't have a bootable system the next time you try. How about six months? My guess is you'd still be stuck fixing shit. Where is the safe "X" in "as long as I update every X, I'll be fine?" Who knows. That's not a very well-defined problem.

I sort of understand the issue here. I use Arch because I'm picky about system things, and it seems to require going against the fewest strongly held platform opinions in order to get it the way I want it. In an ideal world, I'd get it set up that way and not need to touch it very much afterwards. Arch requires frequent touches. Fortunately, almost none of them require any real mental energy, and I'm willing to do the occasional bit of "real work" if needed to keep it going, but that's a trade-off that may be more painful for some than others.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] ikidd@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago (2 children)

MX Linux.

I don't know why it gets recommended so often, I don't actually think many people use it, but for some reason it's brought up all the time. I blame Distrowatch.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] atlasraven31@lemm.ee 13 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Arch is for sweaty fanboy memes, not workflow

[–] BrianTheFirst@kbin.social 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] Zyansheep@programming.dev 11 points 1 year ago

Arch is a wiki with an association distro

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] jollyrogue@lemmy.ml 13 points 1 year ago (5 children)

My list overrated list additions:

  • Ubuntu: They break shit, it’s half baked, snaps, and Canonical is really into vendor lock in.

  • Arch: I really have better things to do then baby sit my install.

  • RHEL: Containers were created for reasons, and one of them was RHEL.

  • Any Linux without systemd or glibc: Mistakes were made, and then different mistakes were made trying to prove systemd made mistakes. Musl based Linux distros are going to have compatibility problems, so I might as well run a different OS. The BSDs are *nix-like systems without glibc with a history and larger communities.

[–] dsemy@lemm.ee 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The BSDs are *nix-like systems without glibc with a history and larger communities.

You can run programs requiring glibc on musl-based distros using a simple chroot though (not to mention using Flatpak/Snap or similar solutions).

Also, as someone who uses a distro without systemd (Void) - my boot and shutdown are both very fast and service management is simple (I didn’t need to read any documentation to define new daemons, I just looked at existing definitions); this is in contrast to my experience the last few times I used systemd distros.

I even had a Debian setup I used regularly with SysV init a few years ago, which also had way better boot/shutdown times than with systemd (on the same exact setup otherwise). Service management was a pain with SysV though.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 11 points 1 year ago

AH, so this is a "tell me your favourite distro" post again. Tribalism isn't cool, man.

[–] TimeSquirrel@kbin.social 10 points 1 year ago (7 children)

Mint. Cinnamon is weird. I've had more problems and weird glitches with Cinnamon than any other DE. And it looks like it's straight out of 2004. That's why I'm a KDE junkie on KDE Neon now.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] throwawayish@lemmy.ml 10 points 1 year ago (9 children)

Elementary OS and Manjaro are the big ones IMO. Sure, they've had their heydays, but it's time to move on.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] aleph@lemm.ee 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Fedora, in the sense that I often see it widely recommended, especially to new users.

It's not bad by any means, but it's a very opinionated distro that requires end users to install a bunch of additional repositories and packages just to make it useable for the average user.

It also still doesn't come with out-of-the-box system restore functionality that works well with btrfs even though it is the default filesystem, unlike OpenSUSE Tumbleweed.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] moitoi@feddit.de 8 points 1 year ago (5 children)

The good/bad Linux distro circlejerk.

People are constantly speaking about what's the best or worst distro in long argumentation loosing their time. Instead, it would nice to make people actually switch to a Linux distro and stay on a distro. Each people people switching from another OS is a win. This matters and how making Linux distros more accessible to everyone.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] skyeye@fosstodon.org 7 points 1 year ago

@valentino I know Ubuntu is the meme answer but I’ve never been satisfied when I use it. On servers and desktops where I want stability, I find Debian to be much more reliable and straightforward. I had two Ubuntu pcs recently and the upgrade gui tool would just kill itself when trying to go to the next version so I had to look up the terminal option. And looking up packages only to find out I’m installing outdated snaps where the permissions get in the way

[–] taanegl@beehaw.org 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

IMHO NixOS, which is what I'm using (full disclosure), is heavily underrated. His subposition was based on an hour of use "a long time ago", which leads me to believe he doesn't fully grasp the versatility of NixOS - or rather the "nix package manager", which is more of a scriptable deployment tool.

What I can do with a dotfile and a single command equates to many more steps in any other given distros. I can recreate a system simply by running said dotfiles on another install, or indeed convert it to a VM image if I wanted to.

So it's like if you took ansible, the aur and added the ability to configure everything from services, packages, filesystems, modules, virtualization, kernel's, users, from a JSON-like dotfile consisting of booleans, arrays, strings and even functions.

It is however overtly complex, there's a disconnect between old nix ("stable") and new nix (flakes, "unstable", experimental but mainstream in the NixOS community) and the documentation needs work, which is what has been funded and is being worked on now.

Thought I'd just chime in, because this guy's take seems glib, uninformed and dismissive...

...though I agree in regards to elementary and solus though.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] DarkThoughts@kbin.social 7 points 1 year ago (6 children)

Definitely Arch and Ubuntu.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] yote_zip@pawb.social 6 points 1 year ago

"Overrated" is a very specific word here. Some of the distros he just talks about their users and not the distro itself. Confusingly, he also then ignores the users entirely for other distros. I went into this assuming it would be low effort content, but it went even lower and ended up being just a "what comes to my mind when I think of this distro" list, which doesn't seem very fair towards some of the distros (near the top of the list even!) that don't have real complaints weighed against them.

load more comments
view more: next ›