I want to support pharonix but damn, chill out ob the ads. Especially the video overlays on mobile. It is unusable without an ad blocker, while at the same time saying they are ad supported.
For near-guaranteed compatibility, there are dedicated manufacturers like System76 and Tuxedo. Framework also claims Linux compatibility but for set tested distros (Ubuntu and Fedora).
Generally, anything with Intel/AMD graphics and Intel Wifi is pretty much guaranteed to work in my experience. For laptops, high-DPI displays can be problematic but the fixes are on Wayland which is getting higher priority now.
Begin small, end big. That works for everything when learning something new. So, with that said, go for Linux Mint Cinnamon.
I begun my Linux journey with elementary OS which is more for macOS users. I was a Windows user so I switched to Linux Mint Cinnamon. After a few years of exploring and learning, I am now using EndeavourOS.
Generally it doesnt really matter but if you can it’s best to avoid using nvidia gpus although they will work under Linux they don’t have as good support doesn’t mean you can’t use a nvidia gpu under linux if you want or have to I mean I’ve got a nvidia gpu in my gaming laptop and while it’s a pain to setup it works somewhat well for gaming
You’ll be fine just get whatever has best price to performance nvidia intel or amd generally amd gpus are best for linux because of there driver support but its still shit a good exanple of this is the r7 370s last drivers being made in 2015
Honestly people over do it with the Nvidia complaints.
Nvidia provides a rock solid driver for Linux. If you are a general consumer it works really really well and it’s easy to install.
Here’s the actual historical issue people have with Nvidia on Linux: it’s a closed source binary which is contradictory to the ethos of Linux.
But he’s the rub, Nvidia open sourced some shit this year, not all of it, but they’re becoming more open about the GPU drivers. But shitting on Nvidia is a hard habit to break lol
I've been using nVidia cards on laptops with Ubuntu much exclusively for ~15 years . Only problem I've ever had was once when I accidentally uninstalled something using apt-get and it took the nvidia drivers with it (because I'm was stupid).
Yeah I also had that “issue” with it. That and the fact that it kinda makes minimized applications transparent for no reason, but when I’m running xfce4 is to have performance and I’m not sure I want to install another extension. Btw, how does Docklike Taskbar play with having the clock, and the status tray on the right? Can it do it?
Are u trying to install on x86 or ARM? ARM has images u can use. As for x86 I didn’t find distro with out of the box bigscreen configured, however there are AUR recipes - makes it easy to use it on Manjaro.
Second one, which I’d rephrase as ubuntu sticking with apt/dpkg as its package manager. Which is really nice if you like ubuntu as a distro already.
Though I don’t really get why there has to be a distro to be beaten. And having flavors is always good. I, for example, don’t like distros changing too much upstream SW, so the more vanilla the better. I don’t like either the periodic releases, and to be rolling release rocks. I don’t like systemd, whereas most distros now a days are systemd dependent. I also dislike network manager and similar and require a distro that keeps support for the basic dhcpcd + wpa_supplicant… All that to say, that no distro fits all needs, so several options are good, no need to have one beating the rest, :)
I switched when one guy unilaterally decided Ubuntu would completely flip its user interface, for no goddamn reason, the night before a long-term-support feature freeze.
Mint is for people who just want stuff to work and not fiddle about too much. It does that very well. Anyone who simply wants an alternative to Windows that is easy to get into and use will be perfectly happy with it. If you want to customise everything to a t, Mint isn’t for you
EndeavourOS is the most simple to work with distro I’ve had. Ubuntu-based and Fedora all were trouble. OpenSUSE was fine but I prefer terminal centric (not saying you cannot use terminal on it). EndeavourOS is amazing. I just yay to update and all works.
Arch is bleeding edge and frequently has minor bugs as a result. This is probably fine for power users and people who want to learn Linux but I wouldn’t give an Arch distro to someone who isn’t techy. They also likely won’t appreciate the frequent updates to applications that they depend on to actually do work.
(I used Arch for almost five years and think it’s one of the best distros)
It’s simple and solid enough to give to people who don’t know what they’re doing, and its Debian/Ubuntu base makes it flexible enough to not slow down power users who want to start modifying it. Other distros that might fit this bill keep shooting themselves in the foot and going off in weird directions, while Linux Mint has been a reputable no-BS distro for a very long time. It’s a workhorse distro without any gimmicks and that’s the point.
Mint was my “gateway distro” to get away from windows as a daily driver. It still is my daily driver and it’s given me enough guardrails to not screw it up too badly and learn.
I’m looking to go further up stream towards Debian. I’ve looked at arch and “arch that’s not allowed to be called arch because it has a gui installer”, but I’m not ready/able/“risk-tolerant-enough” to keep that stable as my daily driver. Fedora dormant seem quite right for me.
I really like mint, it meets my needs, has treated me well.
I looked at Manjaro VERY briefly, and I played with Endeavor a bit. I installed several distros as VMs just to poke around. I found Debian familiar which is likely the main reason I find myself leaning that way.
I use Mint, PopOS, or Arch/EndeavourOS more or less interchangeably. I’ve sincerely never had any issues with Arch’s stability. The term “stable” when describing a distro refers more to the package versions than system stability or overall reliability. Things aren’t necessarily broken cause they’re more up to date. Back in 2020, my laptop didn’t play well with Ubuntu 20.04 because of some power management issue caused by a kernel bug. My only real option was getting off of LTS and switching to 20.10 which had a newer fixed kernel version. So in effect, the Ubuntu LTS was less “stable” for me because of them keeping the kernel version stable.
YMMV, obviously, but most of what I’m doing when doing a fresh install is installing the packages I need, and configuring them. I can do this pretty much regardless of the distro. Most of the difference is if those packages are available in the first place, and how I’ll have to install them if they aren’t in the base repositories. Configs/dotfiles are usually pretty portable. The rest is just well… Linux as usual.
From experience, ignore your instincts and give pure Arch a try. It’s a lot more stable than you’d think, and their wiki has very thorough instructions for everything.
It’s a bit of a trial by fire on your terminal knowledge, but you’ll learn a ton in the process. Worst case, you get fed up trying and just go to Fedora or something after.
i dont have the energy or patience to go to a wiki for my OS, i just want it to work and not be proprietary. besides setting up wine staging and pipewire it’s generally been smooth sailing
I’m with you here, sometimes I’m really lazy and don’t want to mess with it. Other times I’m hell-bent on doing something I know how to do in a GUI through terminal.
Mint has let me keep my system OS rock solid, and I’m not afraid to try about anything in the vm. Reinstall when time permits or just roll back to a snapshot.
I’ve got time shift installed, but I use my computer for work, so there’s some draw to stability and having everything just work.
I’m sure it’d be fine, I’m probably not willing to put in the right amount of effort. I think a big fear for me is I use the computer for work, and while I have others, I prefer this one. I may not have the 15-30min to research and resolve something I did to myself.
I also try not to be the person who asks for help on the same question for the 17th time.
So far I’ve always been able to find answers in documentation or communities. Turns out I’m not so unique. ;).
I would echo that but suggest going to EndevourOS. EOS is a lot easier to install for normal people. What you get is insanely close to pure Arch.
I agree that running Arch is easier than people think. It is very stable. Also, because everything you could want is in the repositories ( and up-to-date ) it does not become a spaghetti like mess over time. No more third-party repos. No more PPAs.
Thanks for this recommendation as it’s potentially a logical step. I’ve thought about this but not researched it enough, yet. I don’t understand enough about the differences yet. Hypothetically, do I need or want Mint on Debian, or do I just want to get the real deal? Not posing the question to you, just what I’ve yet to research further. Mint is currently working fine for me, so there’s no rush.
Going straight to Debian isn’t hard. LMDE might have newer packages, IDK. I used Debian 12 for a bit and still use it on my server. Mint offers a great stock experience but Debian has a hard to explain vanilla coolness if you will. I would also recommend considering OpenSUSE if you haven’t looked at it.
It just works. Whenever anyone I know tells me they are going to install ubuntu or try out linux for the first time - I just tell them to install linux mint and they’ve had no complaints so far.
(Even though I only use mint as a fallback distro, I really appreciate it being there)
I have not used pop recently. To be fair both are kind of similar, at least base wise. So one cannot go wrong with any of the two. I like the traditional layout of cinnamon better than Gnome (out of the box) so I’ll pick Mint.
It’s just that my model is a newer generation Dell and I’ve heard from multiple people that Dell is getting more and more locked down and proprietary like Apple, so im thinking that’s why I haven’t had the best linux experience on this darn thing.
yes Ive heard they are good too, but i’ve been having issues with mine. it came with windows pre-installed, i doubt that plays much of a role but Idk. like the system is naturally fitted for windows only, so the linux experience has been a little rough around the edges. I have no clue, just a thought maybe
To me, the big mistake both make is in the presumption the UI and utilities shipped with those platforms are why people use it. But no. Nobody uses MacOS because of its nifty calculator or the Finder. It’s the overall toolkit integration with apps. Not even look and feel. But consistency in use.
I don’t presume to know why others choose to use anything. But MacOS is highly consistent across apps. Dialog boxes, text input forms, file browsing, hot keys, all the same across applications.
linux
Newest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.