Title is quite self-explanatory, reason I wonder is because every now and then I think to myself “maybe distro X is good, maybe I should try it at some point”, but then I think a bit more and realise it kind of doesn’t make a difference - the only thing I feel kinda matters is rolling vs non-rolling release patterns.
My guiding principles when choosing distro are that I run arch on my desktop because it’s what I’m used to (and AUR is nice to have), and Debian on servers because some people said it’s good and I the non-rolling release gives me peace of mind that I don’t have to update very often. But I could switch both of these out and I really don’t think it would make a difference at all.
Bazzite, Aurora, Proxmox and Ubuntu Server.
One of these is not like the others
It was the first one using Wayland by default that worked on my machine out of the box.
I use Devuan on my servers, changed because I was annoyed that systemd was forced on me. (I have mellowed a bit since and accept that systemd is here to stay)
I chose Mint for my laptop, because I just want a OS that works and still gives me a taskbar. (Here I got fed up when Ubuntu switched away from gnome)
All of them are apt based Linux because it just works and when apt shoots itself in the foot during dist upgrades you can still wrangle it back in working order.
I run a headless Ubuntu server and Mint as my daily driver. I tried Pop OS first, which was great, other than I hated the task bar and had some problems with some apps. I also tried Kubuntu which gave me problem after problem. Mint made everything easy.
Honest question, why add headless? Who used a server with a gui?
Specificity
Feels like saying I drive a car with wheels, the alternative is possible but no one does that.
Its my first server, and I’m not a network admin. Guess I’m not fluent in the lingo.
I wasn’t being rude, genuinely asking! :)
I also don’t know and see some people use it.
I wonder if having a terminal keyboard thing plugged it counts as non headless
My gaming rig is on arch because i need the aur. I use my gaming rig for a bit of development too, dependencies are super easy on arch.
All my laptops, work and personal, run fedora kde because its rock solid and has the best “just works” features while still being a technical distro.
My servers are either alpine because its lightweight and easy to harden, debian for the stability and minimalism. I do have a few arch servers, but those are for testing and they get spun up, do the work they need and then killed.
DietPi for my raspberry because its debian based and has a plethora of automations to do what ever you like with your raspberry. Works on desktop too, well.
Lastly, mint, on my surface pro 5, because it is my obe device that is meant to just browse and be a portal into the internet or to play some movie or something while we are out for vacations or stuff like that.
There are many other distros that I like and use, but I use these the most. I love how each linux distro has its stregths and weaknesses, each their own usecase, you get to finetune what you need to make your life easier.
Void for desktop/laptop. These are the things I like about it.
- Rolling release
- Initial installation is minimal, and doesn’t foist a specific DE or other unessential software on me.
- No systemd
- Nothing similar to Arch’s AUR. I know a lot of people it, but I do not. I mention as the distros are similar.
Debian for my server. But I plan to migrate to Devuan.
- Stable and well tested
- Huge package selection
- Pretty ubiquitously supported. If for whatever reason what you want to run isn’t in the repo, .deb packages and apt repos are often available.
- Minimal installation available.
Debian on my servers as a very stable base, Fedora Kionoite on the laptop to try out the concept of atomic distros.
Arch, because it has what I want for gaming. Also its simple, lots of help in forums and community driven. Im not too big on rolling, but it’s really stable and works.
I have distro hopped a bit, used fedora, ubuntu, debian, and manjora. Stopped on arch as, I like my xfce set up with arch.
KISS - keep it stupid simple or simple stupid.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Long time user of Fedora. Tried Ubuntu but came back to Fedora. But now almost migrated to Almalinux. For software app, use flatpak, which has the latest and no library dependencies. Using Wayland too on Almalinux. So not missing anything since moving to away from Fedora to Almalinux.
Arch. Purely because of the Arch Wiki. I honestly think it’s the easiest OS to troubleshoot as long as you are willing and able to read every now and again.
Agree.
Years ago, I was troubleshooting something (can’t remember what) on Ubuntu and realised the package had fixed the bug, but it wasn’t in the repos yet… like months behind.
Looked at Arch with it’s up to date repos, moved over and never looked back.
I’ve reported bugs since, watched the package get updated and seen the improvement on my system… now that’s what it should be like.
Arch because I wanted to see what the hype about installing it was about and then i just kept it
Debian for everything since it’s one of the few distros that has always been there. It’s one of the second distros to come after after SLS. Distros come and go, but Debian marches on.
Yepp. Started using Debian around the Ham/Slink releases, haven’t found any reason to change yet.
Oh wow yeah I started around the same time. 1998 was a magical time. I stated with a boxed copy of OG Suse but switched to Debian like 6 months later then never switched again. I learned a lot from the thick manual that came with Suse but once I tried Debian everything just clicked. It’s like you learn the Debian rules and philosophy and any package you work with makes sense.
Most big distros are old enough to drink though. Ubuntu is 20yo, Fedora 21yo, openSUSE 18yo, Arch 23yo, Gentoo 23yo. (I got curious and a bit carried away…)
But sure, Debian does have them beat by roughly 10 years (31yo).
I use popos because I own a system 76 and it’s what I’m used to.
