And I just got a Thinkpad E14 for CachyOS (arch based). It auto configured btrfs with snapper. Everything just worked fine so far (fingerprints, cameras, sleep, secure boot, sound, mics, etc)
Fedora is still the king as the main workhorse, no headaches, every 6 months there's a reasonable upgrade.
But I can't help myself going back to arch, it just feels snappier.
So if you have a boring hardware like this thinkpad I got, everything just works, go for Arch.
The main reason I went with Fedora on the XPS was some issues with hardware/wifi/bluetooth from time to time, usually an hour before an important meeting that made me chill, ask for a few minutes to rollback a btrfs snapshot, etc.
I strongly suggest considering a community-run distro instead of one mainly controlled by one corporation unless you desperately want to experience a Microsoft 2.0. IBM is not a charity, they will extract value from their investments.
You do need to read the docs, though. Arch doesn't come with a firewall installed, etc out of the box. It really is a distro that is what you make of it.
I can't imagine recommending anyone run a distro that is effectively 10 years old & not really changing. It's still X11 and (mostly) gtk3!
It was a good option in 2015. And for some people I get that never changing never ever doing anything different is a huge value add for them. But I can't recommend starting your Linux experience by rusting in place, by using entirely backwards looking systems. Trying to ignore the broader ecosystem is a bad first Linux start.
Debian KDE is my go-to recommendation these days. Gnome is also fine but much less familiar, and most users I've found tend to like having options where-as gnome seemingly went to war with settings & customization. Debian isn't the most supportive but it's solid & amazing. Trixie is gonna be great, can't wait for release!
Mint is an absolutely outstanding piece of software. Commitment to stability and ease of use, which is what most regular users want from their OS. It moves slowly, but that's the price you pay for consistency and attention to user friendlyness.
If you're technical try Fedora. It's a bit on the bleeding edge side, but it's a zero-bullshit OS that mostly just works. Debian is another great option, but packages are a bit behind.
> Debian is another great option, but packages are a bit behind.
I've got hardware for a new home server that's waiting to be set up, and I was planning to put Devuan on it. Anyone has any impressions of that?
> If you're not technical honestly just buy a mac.
I have two :) And a couple linux boxes but I mostly ssh into them.
I haven't used desktop linux in ages (about 2013, when I switched from linux desktops to mac desktops).
Once in a while I run into the newest Ubuntu desktop for various reasons (this time I needed a server in a VM and I thought why not, let's install the desktop) and I'm astonished at the corporate style spamminess.
I forgot the details already but i got a wizard style setup screen pushing extra services, then a pop up and an update screen both showed up, one wanting to upgrade me to the next LTS (i used 22.04 for reproducibility reasons) and one informing me there are package updates, in spite of the installer allegedly installing updates just 2 minutes before.
Spam interrupting my work is spam. Plus I installed 22.04 for a reason.
I’m not a Linux newbie asking for advice, I’m just asking what the hell is happening to desktop Linux. As in im reasonably current on headless Linux. It was more respectful of the users concentration last time I used it seriously.
- Firefox is up to date (Fedora is often 2 weeks late on security patches)
- No upgrade cycle. Just `pacman -Syu` on a regular cadence, or whatever you're comfy with.
When you go with the vanilla install of a major distro, I find you simply run into fewer shenanigans.