# Linux Distro Preferences?



## Arkxous (Apr 26, 2013)

I'm curious, what's everyones favorite linux distros, and why? 

There are so many damn distros I don't know what to pick. I want to try something other than Ubuntu.


----------



## Runefox (Apr 26, 2013)

If you want something other than Ubuntu, Debian is what Ubuntu is based on, and is a lot more mature. That said, there's nothing particularly special about Debian - No special window managers, no special software packages, just the Debian flavour of Linux with the apt / dpkg package manager. I prefer the Debian way of handling packages to the Fedora / RPM method, and while it's not as 'fun' to set up as Gentoo, it's much easier and generally I find it to be the most stable and quick to set up distro. It's also very widely supported, and can usually use Ubuntu packages and repos without any trouble.


----------



## Sai_Wolf (Apr 26, 2013)

Runefox said:


> If you want something other than Ubuntu, Debian is what Ubuntu is based on, and is a lot more mature. That said, there's nothing particularly special about Debian - No special window managers, no special software packages, just the Debian flavour of Linux with the apt / dpkg package manager. I prefer the Debian way of handling packages to the Fedora / RPM method, and while it's not as 'fun' to set up as Gentoo, it's much easier and generally I find it to be the most stable and quick to set up distro. It's also very widely supported, and can usually use Ubuntu packages and repos without any trouble.



If you want something other than Ubuntu, Mint would be the way to go imo. And Mint has better compatibility with Ubuntu packages, as it was based on Ubuntu to begin with.

I used to prefer Arch until they went to systemd. Now it's a headache and a half to get a DE up and running. The AUR can be frustrating too at times.

Gentoo is ok, but I find that you invest a good amount of effort for something that could be done by using a binary package manager like apt/rpm/pacman. Unless you just REALLY want the versatility of building packages your way, Gentoo is best left for educational purposes. (Side rant: Why the hell hasn't Gentoo implemented git for emerge --sync yet? Funtoo's been doing this for ages it seems.)

As for me, OP? I use what I use. I don't really have a 'favorite' distro or one that I prefer. I work in a Windows shop, so when I consider Linux, it's "What can I use that will get the job done with the least amount of heart ache?"

And then I wind up going with FreeBSD.


----------



## Dokid (Apr 26, 2013)

I'm fairly new to the Linux world and I found Ubuntu to be my favorite. I've tried Slitaz and Mint with cinnamon, as well as edubuntu. Ubuntu was the easiest to install and is really nice to use when it's live on a USB.


----------



## Seekrit (Apr 30, 2013)

Another vote for Mint. When I was just starting with linux it was nice not to worry about installing drivers and codecs. Now there's a Debian version so I might switch to that.


----------



## Zydala (Apr 30, 2013)

Mint with Cinnamon was my favorite for quite a few years, but Ubuntu has got me really liking Unity, especially with 13.04 being so fast.

I've tried Kubuntu and Fedora and they were okay. If you want to start doing some more advanced stuff try messing with Arch Linux; very customizable if you know what you're doing!


----------



## lol (Apr 30, 2013)

slackware, arch, debian...


----------



## JerryFoxcoon (Apr 30, 2013)

I also am quite new to the linux world. My first try was Linux Mint but I seemed to have strange hardware-related bugs so I switched to Zorin OS which is Ubuntu-based. But I think I'm going to do my next installation with Ubuntu. Or I may go back to Linux Mint... Considering the fact I changed my IBM ThinkCentre M51 for a Lenovo ThinkCentre M55e very recently.


----------



## Duality Jack (May 1, 2013)

I am a big Mint fan. Xubuntu is nice in a pinch. If you don't want to go Debian base though I can't help you, I don't have much of experience outside of that.


----------



## ToeClaws (May 2, 2013)

My vote goes for Mint as well, and there are a number of reasons for it.  There are other distributions which are more base and customizable (Arch, for example) but a good measure of how useful an OS is comes down to the overall experience.  Most of the Mint releases are based on Ubuntu, and another is based on Debian.  In both cases, rather than just create a few tweaks to the parent base like most distributions do, the Mint team write a great deal of their own unique software, and are not shy when it comes to forking off something and making it better if it needs to be done, such as creating the Cinnamon shell from Gnome3 (shell being the desktop interface, for those who might not know what a shell is).  Mint also provides the most complete environment in the sense that as much as possible works "out of the box".  I also find Mint to be a bit more polished than Ubuntu in that they take time in the month or so between Ubuntu and Mint's releases to make sure things work as well as possible, and that things are tweaked when and where they can be.

Installation of a Mint distribution is very simple, and also allows for enough customization that a more savvy user can do all custom partitions and options. Software installation after the install is a breeze for the novice, and again, there are plenty of tools for an expert to use as well.  As with any OS that tries to cater to everyone, power users and experts will find Mint to bit a bit bulky with things they don't need, but it's relatively quick and easy to turn said things off and trim it down to whatever suits you.

Another reason I like it is that it offers good flexibility in having a few release flavours.  For modern machines with good power and memory, you have the Cinnamon and KDE versions (again, this is in reference to shell environments for those not clear on difference), and for older machines you have the MATE, XFCE and LXDE versions.  If you like the more manual/minimal approach, you can use the Debian version which is much more trimmed down, and yet still available in Cinnamon, MATE or XFCE versions.  There's also recently been a Mint derivative call Peppermint, which uses LXDE as the shell and focuses on being as lightweight as possible for older systems.

I have systems ranging from an old PIII 900 laptop with 256M of ram up to a 3rd gen i7 3770 with 32G of RAM running Mint of some kind, and it performs beautifully on all them.  

Other ones I like and some thoughts about them:

Ubuntu: Of course, this is the more famous of them.  Generally a lot of the same good comments as Mint, but where I find Ubuntu lacking is on completeness: It's not quite as functional "out of the box" as Mint.  The main version also uses a shell called Unity, which is much more touch-oriented and application-centric (like a mobile phone or tablet OS) as opposed to task-centric (like Windows XP or 7's explorer shell).  Xubuntu (XFCE shell) or Lubuntu (LXDE shell) are the more traditional task-centric type environments, and a better choice in the direct Ubuntu family if that's what you're more familiar with.

Puppy Linux: Not quite a normal distribution, Puppy is more of a single-user lightweight.  Puppy's charm is that it's small - very small, and runs well on just about anything.  If you need to carry a really useful live CD around with ya, Puppy's a great distribution to have on it.  The "Wary" versions for older systems can operate on as little as 64M of RAM, so if you can't get something working on Puppy... you're dealing with REALLY old hardware.


----------



## probabilitywolf (May 4, 2013)

Well, I'd always recommend Debian. It is fairly light, and it is also powerful (the easy apt-get package manager, for one thing). Ubuntu may be based on Debian, but it is more or less the least secure distro of Linux due to the shoddy filesystem.

Fedora, CentOS and OpenSuSE Linux are pretty good - my first Linux experience was with SuSE, back in '07. Since then I've used plenty, and Debian and Fedora have stayed my top favorites.

Word of warning about Debian: it often looks ugly when first installed. There are plenty of themes on the net to clean that up though. And you will need a nice wallpaper, of course 

As for ToeClaws, and the others who recommend Mint Linux, I can see the attraction, I just don't like it as much as the others. Debian, for example, is super compatible, and will run on just about any machine.

Sorry - one more thing worth mentioning: You can run Windows software on Linux if you want to using the "Wine" emulator (well, "Wine Is Not an Emulator" - recursive acronym )


----------



## Runefox (May 4, 2013)

But it's NOT an emulator - Wine simply translates the API calls, it's still all x86 code. Running Wine on a PowerPC or ARM processor won't let you run Windows programs (... Though, I'm curious about Win8 RT apps. Hmmmm...)

I've never really liked Fedora / RedHat. My first experience with RPM-based distros was with Mandrake 8. While it was fun and easy to use, dependencies and the package management in general were a mess. Haven't really touched an RPM distro since... RedHat 8(? maybe 7.2) or Fedora Core 3? And even then not very much.


----------



## probabilitywolf (May 4, 2013)

Runefox said:


> But it's NOT an emulator - Wine simply translates the API calls, it's still all x86 code. Running Wine on a PowerPC or ARM processor won't let you run Windows programs (... Though, I'm curious about Win8 RT apps. Hmmmm...)



Agreed about the emulator - I just used that term to make it simpler to describe. But that is a good point about non-x86 processors. I've never tried Linux on a non-x86, so I didn't actually think about that.



Runefox said:


> While it was fun and easy to use, dependencies and the package management in general were a mess.


No kidding. I can't stand using RPM files, they are so messy, and the package manager in most of these distros is... dreadful. I stick to APT based distros for this reason. I'd only reccomend an RPM based one to a complete beginner - someone who just wants something pretty that works out of the box? But yeah, I think I might just take back my recommendations about RPM package manager dependent Linux.


----------



## kayfox (May 4, 2013)

probabilitywolf said:


> Fedora, CentOS and OpenSuSE Linux are pretty good - my first Linux experience was with SuSE, back in '07. Since then I've used plenty, and Debian and Fedora have stayed my top favorites.



My first experience with SuSE was 4.3 in 96 or 97... it was kinda clunky... went back to Slackware.  The next version I tried was 5.3, which seemed to work much better.  I spent some time using Caldera (SCO Group) Linux until switching to SuSE at version 6.4.  I currently use openSuSE, Ubuntu (Server) LTS and Centos*.

* I also work with a derivative of Centos called F5 TMOS for 8 hours a day at work.


----------



## Seekrit (Jun 20, 2013)

Having spent the last week or so messing about with various distros, I have to say Peppermint OS is probably the best OS I've ever used. It's absurdly fast for an Ubuntu derivative, user-friendly, and only needs minimal configuration after installation. That last point may not even apply if its installed on a desktop.

I've been looking to permanently ditch Windows for a while now (I never actually paid for a copy of Win7, and I felt bad about that) and I think Peppermint is the OS for me.


----------

