>Opensuse
Stable and simple >mint
Stable and easy to use >gentoo
Unstable, build everything from source customization heaven. >arch
BTW this meme is old. Discount gentoo that has better user repo integration and doesn't need you to built everything from source. >Debian
Stable beauty. Great repository. The bed rock of most good distros. It often gets over looked but is worth it without all the shit people put on top of it. >fedora
Stable cutting edge distro. Expect some experimental things. >Ubuntu
Same as fedora, but without the balls to do anything innovative any more. >Slackware
For the people that thought gentoo was for b***hes or just wanted to make their own distro without going through the trouble of Linux from scratch.
>stable vs unstable
If you ever want to know someone who still has windows installed, they mention the stability of distros foremost.
For the ultimate test though, ask them; "What do you mean by unstable?".
They'll mention something about the user breaking the system via the package manager then you'll no for a fact they're PPA pumping morons.
>What do I mean by unstable
I mean not liable to break shit on an update. I also mean that they don't just dump the dev branch into an update. They actually run test and quality assurance before they add it to the distro repo. Also no I don't pump PPA. I don't need to add a bunch of bloat to my system.
>stable system if I don't update
I haven't even had an update brick the system. Yes you do get the occasional package conflicts when emerging @world after syncing but those are usually trivial to resolve.
Not him but gentoo doesn't break when you update.
If you wait a long time to update, portage will complain. But it won't break anything. It complains *instead* of breaking anything. And then you go and fix its complaints, which often, but not always, consists of nothing more than responding to some prompts. And then the update goes through and everything works.
You sound like someone who's used arch, heard gentoo was a harder arch, and are making some reasonable but incorrect extrapolations about how package management works on gentoo
>dump dev branch into an update
You're moronic and have no idea what you're talking about beyond second and third-hand info.
Break systems before you talk like this.
Rolling release distros us a single version and the most modern one at that to increase stability over a long term support model that needs to maintain a strict feature-set which introduces fragility.
You "stable/unstable" tards piss me off to no end with the shit you fling just to buy into a commercial model of locking down features.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Oh sorry I thought they bothered to separate dev and production. That'd even worse they don't even bother to have a separate branch to test this shit.
Pic related (rolling release dev writing an update)
2 years ago
Anonymous
>they don't even bother
That's not quite accurate. If they didn't want to even bother, they wouldn't make a distro. They do things this way because they believe it's better.
>gentoo >unstable
Funny how my Gentoo system is the most stable of all my Linux machines. I haven't seen a single linker error nor had it bricked to the point of having to use a live distro to fix it.
>Arch
Good, best for personal use >Debian
Good, best for any kind of occupation requiring computers >Mint
OK, best for people switching from windows >Fedora
OK, best for people switching from macOS >suse,slackware
Not good. Used by contrarians >ubuntu
Bad. Canonical shat the bed. Irredeemable >Gentoo
Not a distro, it's an empty slate. Used by autists
It's not good. Didn't say bad, it's just not good. It's only saving grace is that it's underrated so contrarians will use it and make shitty memes promoting their mid distro like it's god's gift to earth.
>the installer sets up btrfs + automatic snapshots + bootable snapshots
You install, set up your system once, this isn't important. Your post tells me you are a distrohopping homosexual, you'll probably change to something else and cream yourself about how good it is in a month.
There isn't necessary something wrong with the distro itself but it's often used by the people who want to use a rolling release distro but arch is too popular for them
>mint
better than ubuntu only because it doesn't force its sluggish proprietary software distribution everywhere
>gentoo
meme
>arch
shit used only by autists and elitists. so, shit used only by autists
just use debian sid without choosing any de on install, better experience if you need to customize it
>debian
the best distro, its only flaw is systemd
>fedora
good for newbies
>ubuntu
gets worse with every release, latest release made ubuntu fan i know irl switch for whatever reason
>slackware
don't see a reason for sane person to use it
>SUSE
YaST is alright for managing some stuff in a GUI setup but I found it to be best in non-gui setup for managing a server since it gives you a nice TUI for doing a lot of stuff
I didn't have the knowhow to do all that, not just btrfs with proper and sensible subvolume layout but also snapper, automatic snapshots, grub having those snapshots beings bootable and so on. That's why you read the whole sentence anon lol
>green one >green one but bloatyer >purple one but packages take forever to install >blue one >red one >blue one but less packages >orange one this one is bad don't use it >blue one but the package manager is literally make
>suse
Probably the only good rolling release since it is corporate backed, but I've never used it >mint
big waste of effort since it could just be a desktop on top of ubuntu, without forking repositories. That said, it provides a nice end user experience. >gentoo
lol >arch
stupid, you can customize any distro just as easily. And there are tons of things you have to set up manually that just werk in other distros. Printing, ssh agent, fonts, are some of the ones I remember. Also during the few months I used it, an update borked it once and I had to fix it in the live session. The AUR and ports system sounds good in theory, but it's easier to use docker containers nowadays. >debian
no reason to use something this old on the desktop. "Stable" doesn't mean it will work better, just that it's not changing. Which isn't necessarily good. >Fedora
based. Drives innovation in linux, ideal release/update model, corporate backing makes it much more professional than others. More secure. The name triggers feminists. >Ubuntu
Still great, but slightly in decline now that canonical doesn't care about the desktop as much. The software center is worse than fedora. It's the most popular distro by far, so any software that supports linux will support ubuntu, but not necessarily anything else. >slackware
ok boomer
Not even saying I like your opinions but you're the most right in this thread. The corporate sector is already pushing shit that's becoming widely adopted. GNU/Linux will always stay free but corporations are going to be the ones to actually push Linux and possibly have any real chance of making it mainstream.
(1/2) >openSUSE, Fedora
never tried em >Mint
the perfect ootb desktop experience, simple as >Gentoo
max-autist distro. good distro for aspiring programmers to learn about compiling, build systems, packaging, and how these look to an end user. good for optimization, manual security, minimalist autismo, paranoid source auditing, site-local patches, plus easy to setup bleeding-edge dev suites that would be hard to setup on other distros, if you really "sneed" that sparkly gcc 12+ feature. package manager is super-friendly and super-resilient >Arch
never used this either but from what i've heard it's a bit like a gentoo lite. no use flags, not necessarily any building from source, but you still get customization (somehow?) apparently there's something extra-special about the "aur," its implementation of third-party repos, so it has that going for it. i've indirectly used "arch" in a sense, i dual-boot with a win 10 ameliorated install and run msys2 on it which from what i understand is an arch-based mingw distro, never had any problems with it, works great, any problems i ever did have with it were windows' fault. >Debian
i, and, i feel, most of the community, will always see this as the "definitive" gnu/linux implementation. i am an anti-systemd schizo, so i'm never using it again, but i must admit it was a good run. just all-around solid distro. apt isn't a perfect package manager but it's almost always good enough. >Ubuntu
tries to take debian and turn it into the perfect ootb desktop experience like mint. (well it's anachronistic to say it wants to be "like mint" since ubuntu came first but you know what i mean.) only gets halfway there imho. not a fan of snaps, don't like all those loop devices cluttering up lsblk, i know that's the most brainlet reason not to like it but listen i just don't. not really a fan of the corporate backing either. canonical seems like a corporation with an excellent value system. but it is a corporation. automatic distrust.
>suse
i recall it has yast2 or something like that, it's pretty good, but not worth installing it
>mint
better than ubuntu only because it doesn't force its sluggish proprietary software distribution everywhere
>gentoo
meme
>arch
shit used only by autists and elitists. so, shit used only by autists
just use debian sid without choosing any de on install, better experience if you need to customize it
>debian
the best distro, its only flaw is systemd
>fedora
good for newbies
>ubuntu
gets worse with every release, latest release made ubuntu fan i know irl switch for whatever reason
>slackware
don't see a reason for sane person to use it
>openSUSE >Linux Mint
Best justwerks distros >Gentoo
Kino, best distribution. >Arch
Poorly maintained, not that minimalist anyway >Debian
It's fine for desktop and server, universal. >Fedora
No opinion >Ubuntu
Made obsolete by Mint and openSuse >Slackware
Kino, second best distribution.
(OP) >OpenSUSE
btfo'd the israelites so they can't be that bad >Mint
a great distro for getting people away from windows, there is nothing wrong with that >Gentoo
meme distro, made for autistic troons >Arch
meme distro, made for pedophiles >Debian
very stable but lacks a lot due to slow update cycles, it still just werks >Fedora
I like it, people like to think that anything RHEL = le bad but fedora also just werks, I take more issue with the reddit name than I do how it performs >Ubuntu
It's good enough. I still use it. I don't see why it gets such a bad reputation. >Slackware
Gentoo + Arch in terms of mental illness
>opensus
Never tried it. >green nazi
Killed itself after two years. >Gentoomen
Never tried it. >fatman
Perfect for me. I barely exist. >cuckian
For boomers. Never tried it. >mlady
Never tried it. Clown name and facebook logo lol >ubuntu
Slow, worse than mint (how?) >slackware
Never tried it.
>openSUSE
The free version of commercial SUSE and is almost as good as the commercial version, just releases are less mature, not so well-tested, and its users receive less support from the company. >Mint
Not as bloated as Ubuntu but still useful. Derived from Ubuntu IIRC. I have never used it. >Gentoo
Should never be used on a Desktop. Only suitable for a few niche cases where performance is very important. The most annoying thing about it is that the package manager downloads only source code and packages have to be compiled on the user's computer. Such a waste of time and energy! >Arch
The most useless meme distro on this list. Good for (almost) nothing. Wannabe h4x0r5 and some NEETS love it because it gives the opportunity to feel special without investing time in learning fundamentals and without wasting time compiling packages from source code on Gentoo or LFS. These wannabes give high ratings for Arch distro and very low ratings for distros that are useful and actually used in the industry. As a result, after checking reviews and ratings, I fell for it and I wasted 5 years of my life with it. It is good enough to browse IQfy and watch anime. To be fair, it still has a use case but it is very niche: Arch is good for a very few OSS developers who need to test the latest and immature versions of various packages. >Debian
Many distros including Ubuntu are based on it so it. It should be good. >Fedora
It is used by Linux Torvalds. It is great for Linux kernel development and useful in general. >Ubuntu
It is the best GNU/Linux distro for the desktop because it has LTS releases, and it is very popular. So most OSS and proprietary software developers test their GNU/Linux software on this distro. A popular choice in the industry. I have to use it on my work laptop. Default DE sucks (GNOME) but KDE can be used instead. >Slackware
Afaik, very mature and more secure distro which can also be used on quite old PCs. Better to avoid it since it is not popular.
>openSUSE
german fedora >mint
ubuntu for baby ducks coming from Windows >gentoo
useful to optimize for certain use-cases, none of which apply to the average IQfy poster. >arch
tinker distro >debian
extreme stability is the selling point, tinkerers will tell you to use sid even though it's less stable than other rolling release distros for no gain >fedora
red hat but less stable with experimental features. >ubuntu
debian, but not old as frick while keeping decent stability guarantees. kind of like fedora to red hat, but more stable. canonical wants to ruin it though. >Slackware
boomerware used by autists.
keep in mind, stability doesn't mean "likelihood to crash," it means the lifetime and support of packages.
Here's a real summary: >OSuse
Just works. Enterprise. Used to be GKH's choice. Zypper >Mint
Just works. Popular Ubuntu downstream, for good reason, given that Ubuntu fricking sucks now. APT. >Gentoo
If it moves, compile it. Emerge. >Arch
Just works. Dead simple. Used by GKH. Pacman. >Debian
Timely messages on unrelated topics. On a server somewhere. APT. >Fedora
Enterprise. Linus' pick. DNF. >Ubuntu
Avoid newer releases, for your own sake. APT. >Slackware
Oldie distro. pkgtool.
And, obviously, these can be point or rolling depending on distro/distro version. Do your own homework and stop shitting up the board.
>susAH
pretty good, but nothing revolutionary.
>Mint
susAH but for the newbie
>Gentoo
Obsolete autismOS for stallman evangelists & picrel
>Arch
Autism & AUR crutch and sysd = bad
>Debian
Outdated as shit, apt is okay but there are better alternatives.
>Fedora
Red hat trial, Lazy dev's distro (not always bad).
>Ooboontoo
Avoid at all costs
>Slackwhat?
Old as shit, nostalgiagays only
Summary: Install void
https://voidlinux.org/
Or if you're a picky gay, try this
https://distrochooser.de/en/
incredible how everything you said was wrong
moronic voidtroony
yes
>everything you said was wrong
>You are wrong because... Youre wrong!!!!!!
>haha get owned troony!!!!!!!
>Gentoo
>for stallman evangelists
Are you moronic? RMS would never use Gentoo because it is not a distro approved by the fsf, and it doesn't have the respects your freedom badge.
>suse derivative
>mint
>stallman evangelists
>gentoo
>sysd = bad
>Arch
void really is the midwit distro, isn't it
Good, good, great, good, good, bad, bad, great
>meme distro great
>mainstream 'just works' distros bad
the absolute state of IQfy
I called Mint good
>mint
>just works
just no
>IQfytard
>thinks
just no
Black person
Die brainlet
Kek
>Gentoo
>great
>Arch
>good
>Fedora
>bad
What a fricking clown lmao
reddit is the other way
the door to go outside is THAT way
>J4Y TA
exactly my thought except completely opposite
>Opensuse
Stable and simple
>mint
Stable and easy to use
>gentoo
Unstable, build everything from source customization heaven.
>arch
BTW this meme is old. Discount gentoo that has better user repo integration and doesn't need you to built everything from source.
>Debian
Stable beauty. Great repository. The bed rock of most good distros. It often gets over looked but is worth it without all the shit people put on top of it.
>fedora
Stable cutting edge distro. Expect some experimental things.
>Ubuntu
Same as fedora, but without the balls to do anything innovative any more.
>Slackware
For the people that thought gentoo was for b***hes or just wanted to make their own distro without going through the trouble of Linux from scratch.
>customization heaven
So... For morons?
Nothing you can' t do everywhere else.
>Discount gentoo
It's comparable only because same type of moron uses it. Arch troons transition into software schizos, becoming gentards
>Same as fedora, but without the balls to do anything innovative any more.
*and becoming more and more of a shitfest with snaps and choices
>stable vs unstable
If you ever want to know someone who still has windows installed, they mention the stability of distros foremost.
For the ultimate test though, ask them; "What do you mean by unstable?".
They'll mention something about the user breaking the system via the package manager then you'll no for a fact they're PPA pumping morons.
>What do I mean by unstable
I mean not liable to break shit on an update. I also mean that they don't just dump the dev branch into an update. They actually run test and quality assurance before they add it to the distro repo. Also no I don't pump PPA. I don't need to add a bunch of bloat to my system.
I too can have a stable system if I don't update. I meant stable when you update.
>stable system if I don't update
I haven't even had an update brick the system. Yes you do get the occasional package conflicts when emerging @world after syncing but those are usually trivial to resolve.
Not him but gentoo doesn't break when you update.
If you wait a long time to update, portage will complain. But it won't break anything. It complains *instead* of breaking anything. And then you go and fix its complaints, which often, but not always, consists of nothing more than responding to some prompts. And then the update goes through and everything works.
You sound like someone who's used arch, heard gentoo was a harder arch, and are making some reasonable but incorrect extrapolations about how package management works on gentoo
>dump dev branch into an update
You're moronic and have no idea what you're talking about beyond second and third-hand info.
Break systems before you talk like this.
Rolling release distros us a single version and the most modern one at that to increase stability over a long term support model that needs to maintain a strict feature-set which introduces fragility.
You "stable/unstable" tards piss me off to no end with the shit you fling just to buy into a commercial model of locking down features.
Oh sorry I thought they bothered to separate dev and production. That'd even worse they don't even bother to have a separate branch to test this shit.
Pic related (rolling release dev writing an update)
>they don't even bother
That's not quite accurate. If they didn't want to even bother, they wouldn't make a distro. They do things this way because they believe it's better.
>gentoo
>unstable
Funny how my Gentoo system is the most stable of all my Linux machines. I haven't seen a single linker error nor had it bricked to the point of having to use a live distro to fix it.
>Arch
Good, best for personal use
>Debian
Good, best for any kind of occupation requiring computers
>Mint
OK, best for people switching from windows
>Fedora
OK, best for people switching from macOS
>suse,slackware
Not good. Used by contrarians
>ubuntu
Bad. Canonical shat the bed. Irredeemable
>Gentoo
Not a distro, it's an empty slate. Used by autists
>Suse not good used by contrarians
What's wrong with suse?
It's not good. Didn't say bad, it's just not good. It's only saving grace is that it's underrated so contrarians will use it and make shitty memes promoting their mid distro like it's god's gift to earth.
>the installer sets up btrfs + automatic snapshots + bootable snapshots
You install, set up your system once, this isn't important. Your post tells me you are a distrohopping homosexual, you'll probably change to something else and cream yourself about how good it is in a month.
There isn't necessary something wrong with the distro itself but it's often used by the people who want to use a rolling release distro but arch is too popular for them
I've seen it mentioned here only a few times, I think it's different sort of niche distros people go for to feel different
>SUSE
YaST is alright for managing some stuff in a GUI setup but I found it to be best in non-gui setup for managing a server since it gives you a nice TUI for doing a lot of stuff
I use openSUSE because the installer sets up btrfs + automatic snapshots + bootable snapshots for me. Also because KDE is great on openSUSE
>installer sets up btrfs
It's like 5 commands ONCE anon...
That's not a valid reason
>KDE
Fair choice
I didn't have the knowhow to do all that, not just btrfs with proper and sensible subvolume layout but also snapper, automatic snapshots, grub having those snapshots beings bootable and so on. That's why you read the whole sentence anon lol
Didn't know how to do it, so it was important for me. That's how these things kinda work. Also I've had this install for I think five years lol
>green one
>green one but bloatyer
>purple one but packages take forever to install
>blue one
>red one
>blue one but less packages
>orange one this one is bad don't use it
>blue one but the package manager is literally make
Trash.
>suse
Probably the only good rolling release since it is corporate backed, but I've never used it
>mint
big waste of effort since it could just be a desktop on top of ubuntu, without forking repositories. That said, it provides a nice end user experience.
>gentoo
lol
>arch
stupid, you can customize any distro just as easily. And there are tons of things you have to set up manually that just werk in other distros. Printing, ssh agent, fonts, are some of the ones I remember. Also during the few months I used it, an update borked it once and I had to fix it in the live session. The AUR and ports system sounds good in theory, but it's easier to use docker containers nowadays.
>debian
no reason to use something this old on the desktop. "Stable" doesn't mean it will work better, just that it's not changing. Which isn't necessarily good.
>Fedora
based. Drives innovation in linux, ideal release/update model, corporate backing makes it much more professional than others. More secure. The name triggers feminists.
>Ubuntu
Still great, but slightly in decline now that canonical doesn't care about the desktop as much. The software center is worse than fedora. It's the most popular distro by far, so any software that supports linux will support ubuntu, but not necessarily anything else.
>slackware
ok boomer
Not even saying I like your opinions but you're the most right in this thread. The corporate sector is already pushing shit that's becoming widely adopted. GNU/Linux will always stay free but corporations are going to be the ones to actually push Linux and possibly have any real chance of making it mainstream.
is a mainstream linux a goal? just look at gaming, scifi, fantasy, and everything other fun "nerd" thing there ever was
(1/2)
>openSUSE, Fedora
never tried em
>Mint
the perfect ootb desktop experience, simple as
>Gentoo
max-autist distro. good distro for aspiring programmers to learn about compiling, build systems, packaging, and how these look to an end user. good for optimization, manual security, minimalist autismo, paranoid source auditing, site-local patches, plus easy to setup bleeding-edge dev suites that would be hard to setup on other distros, if you really "sneed" that sparkly gcc 12+ feature. package manager is super-friendly and super-resilient
>Arch
never used this either but from what i've heard it's a bit like a gentoo lite. no use flags, not necessarily any building from source, but you still get customization (somehow?) apparently there's something extra-special about the "aur," its implementation of third-party repos, so it has that going for it. i've indirectly used "arch" in a sense, i dual-boot with a win 10 ameliorated install and run msys2 on it which from what i understand is an arch-based mingw distro, never had any problems with it, works great, any problems i ever did have with it were windows' fault.
>Debian
i, and, i feel, most of the community, will always see this as the "definitive" gnu/linux implementation. i am an anti-systemd schizo, so i'm never using it again, but i must admit it was a good run. just all-around solid distro. apt isn't a perfect package manager but it's almost always good enough.
>Ubuntu
tries to take debian and turn it into the perfect ootb desktop experience like mint. (well it's anachronistic to say it wants to be "like mint" since ubuntu came first but you know what i mean.) only gets halfway there imho. not a fan of snaps, don't like all those loop devices cluttering up lsblk, i know that's the most brainlet reason not to like it but listen i just don't. not really a fan of the corporate backing either. canonical seems like a corporation with an excellent value system. but it is a corporation. automatic distrust.
(2/2)
>Slackware
lfs with ootb gui
>krauts
>green ubuntu
>autism
>obesity
>unemployed boomers
>employed boomers
>orange debian
>geriatrics
summarize this *unzips dick*
Dont ever tell me what to do
>suse
corpo Black personware
>mint
just werks
>gentoo
autistic
>arch
pacman fricked up my xorg.conf
>debian
white mans distro
>fedora
corpo but just werks
>ubuntu
just use mint or fedora
>slackware
autistic but seems fine
summary: just use debian/devuan/mint
I wasted 10 hours installing debian and ubuntu 1710 mini iso once
if only i had tried puppy instead
>I wasted 10 hours installing debian and ubuntu 1710 mini iso once
... How?
debian install is slow
it kept fricking up the grub thing at the very end
>slackware
best distro,better arch and better gentwo and better debian
>suse
i recall it has yast2 or something like that, it's pretty good, but not worth installing it
>mint
better than ubuntu only because it doesn't force its sluggish proprietary software distribution everywhere
>gentoo
meme
>arch
shit used only by autists and elitists. so, shit used only by autists
just use debian sid without choosing any de on install, better experience if you need to customize it
>debian
the best distro, its only flaw is systemd
>fedora
good for newbies
>ubuntu
gets worse with every release, latest release made ubuntu fan i know irl switch for whatever reason
>slackware
don't see a reason for sane person to use it
>anything linux
not worth using on the desktop
>openSUSE
>Linux Mint
Best justwerks distros
>Gentoo
Kino, best distribution.
>Arch
Poorly maintained, not that minimalist anyway
>Debian
It's fine for desktop and server, universal.
>Fedora
No opinion
>Ubuntu
Made obsolete by Mint and openSuse
>Slackware
Kino, second best distribution.
>openSUSE
Good but bloated
>Linux Mint
Just use Ubuntu or Debian
>Gentoo
If you really need that useflag 0.01% performance increase its useful otherwise dont bother
>Arch
If you like a DIY distro very good otherwise pick Tumbleweed if you still want a rolling release but dont want to do everything yourself
>Debian
Good if you have limited internet speeds or for your elderly family members if you install the packages for them
>Fedora
Its users unironically believe themselves to be big brained while they are being used as free beta testers for RHEL
>Ubuntu
Just works but snaps are cancer
>Slackware
Never used it so i cant tell
(OP)
>OpenSUSE
btfo'd the israelites so they can't be that bad
>Mint
a great distro for getting people away from windows, there is nothing wrong with that
>Gentoo
meme distro, made for autistic troons
>Arch
meme distro, made for pedophiles
>Debian
very stable but lacks a lot due to slow update cycles, it still just werks
>Fedora
I like it, people like to think that anything RHEL = le bad but fedora also just werks, I take more issue with the reddit name than I do how it performs
>Ubuntu
It's good enough. I still use it. I don't see why it gets such a bad reputation.
>Slackware
Gentoo + Arch in terms of mental illness
>opensus
Never tried it.
>green nazi
Killed itself after two years.
>Gentoomen
Never tried it.
>fatman
Perfect for me. I barely exist.
>cuckian
For boomers. Never tried it.
>mlady
Never tried it. Clown name and facebook logo lol
>ubuntu
Slow, worse than mint (how?)
>slackware
Never tried it.
Classify the distros in terms of
>Reliability and stability
>Justworks VS RTFM
>Bloat
Debian and Arch are based. The rest are just meme distros for Black folk
>openSUSE
The free version of commercial SUSE and is almost as good as the commercial version, just releases are less mature, not so well-tested, and its users receive less support from the company.
>Mint
Not as bloated as Ubuntu but still useful. Derived from Ubuntu IIRC. I have never used it.
>Gentoo
Should never be used on a Desktop. Only suitable for a few niche cases where performance is very important. The most annoying thing about it is that the package manager downloads only source code and packages have to be compiled on the user's computer. Such a waste of time and energy!
>Arch
The most useless meme distro on this list. Good for (almost) nothing. Wannabe h4x0r5 and some NEETS love it because it gives the opportunity to feel special without investing time in learning fundamentals and without wasting time compiling packages from source code on Gentoo or LFS. These wannabes give high ratings for Arch distro and very low ratings for distros that are useful and actually used in the industry. As a result, after checking reviews and ratings, I fell for it and I wasted 5 years of my life with it. It is good enough to browse IQfy and watch anime. To be fair, it still has a use case but it is very niche: Arch is good for a very few OSS developers who need to test the latest and immature versions of various packages.
>Debian
Many distros including Ubuntu are based on it so it. It should be good.
>Fedora
It is used by Linux Torvalds. It is great for Linux kernel development and useful in general.
>Ubuntu
It is the best GNU/Linux distro for the desktop because it has LTS releases, and it is very popular. So most OSS and proprietary software developers test their GNU/Linux software on this distro. A popular choice in the industry. I have to use it on my work laptop. Default DE sucks (GNOME) but KDE can be used instead.
>Slackware
Afaik, very mature and more secure distro which can also be used on quite old PCs. Better to avoid it since it is not popular.
Waste of time
All the cool kids use ghostbsd
>openSUSE
german fedora
>mint
ubuntu for baby ducks coming from Windows
>gentoo
useful to optimize for certain use-cases, none of which apply to the average IQfy poster.
>arch
tinker distro
>debian
extreme stability is the selling point, tinkerers will tell you to use sid even though it's less stable than other rolling release distros for no gain
>fedora
red hat but less stable with experimental features.
>ubuntu
debian, but not old as frick while keeping decent stability guarantees. kind of like fedora to red hat, but more stable. canonical wants to ruin it though.
>Slackware
boomerware used by autists.
keep in mind, stability doesn't mean "likelihood to crash," it means the lifetime and support of packages.
>SUSE
Most forgettable distro
>Mint
Ubuntu with less shitty but still shitty DE
>Gentoo
Has it's purpose, I'd never use it
>Arch
I only use it because pacman is really easy to use and understand.
>Debian
Add a repo for literally every individual package you need and each of their dependencies
>Fedora
>>Fedora
>Ubuntu
Debian for Indians and NPCs, has slightly less repo problems, but apt is still a shitty package manager.
>Slack
Only good for fun. My dad taught me a ton about Linux with Slack, but it's too tedious to install and update.
The left has trannies
The right has honest workers
Coincidentally, this also reflects the political spectrum.
no I don't think I will mister bot
>SUSE
The fat kid who is kind of nice, but nobody hangs out.
>Linux Mint
The kid who looks smart but is really dumb.
>Gentoo
The kid they keep in a classroom you've never seen. You seem him occasionally during fire drills.
>Arch
The kid with a leather trench coat and that 2000's Linkin Park spiked haircut.
>Debian
That 5/10 bawd everyone makes fun of, but secretly wants to frick.
>Fedora
The clean-cut military kid who always talks about joining the military, but never does.
>Ubuntu
The rich cheerleader. She dates Chad and her dad is a prominent member of the community. Everyone hates her but secretly wants to be her.
>Slackware
That old man who teaches algebra to an empty classroom.
>Shit thread
>All meme responses
Here's a real summary:
>OSuse
Just works. Enterprise. Used to be GKH's choice. Zypper
>Mint
Just works. Popular Ubuntu downstream, for good reason, given that Ubuntu fricking sucks now. APT.
>Gentoo
If it moves, compile it. Emerge.
>Arch
Just works. Dead simple. Used by GKH. Pacman.
>Debian
Timely messages on unrelated topics. On a server somewhere. APT.
>Fedora
Enterprise. Linus' pick. DNF.
>Ubuntu
Avoid newer releases, for your own sake. APT.
>Slackware
Oldie distro. pkgtool.
And, obviously, these can be point or rolling depending on distro/distro version. Do your own homework and stop shitting up the board.