What distros have you tried and thought, "Nope, this one's not for me"?
I’ve been using Linux Mint since forever. I’ve never felt a reason to change. But I’m interested in what persuaded others to move.
I’ve been using Linux Mint since forever. I’ve never felt a reason to change. But I’m interested in what persuaded others to move.
nobleshift, Marinix. It’s aimed at mariners & sailors. Small and fast but not full featured and it uses a weird kernel implementation. It does however have customized Muplex which I ripped off for the next dristro which I love :
Navigatrix - OpenCPN, zyGrib. SSB / HAM control, tidal info, radar and AIS overlay. RTL-SDR AIS, PACTOR 2 soft modrm, and so much more. It runs my main navigation computer
haroldstork, Fedora. Fedora is solid, but coming from arch I felt it was lacking so much in the way of the package repos and doing things like secure boot was more effort than it was worth.
heygooberman, (edited ) I used Linux Mint for about 1.5 years before transitioning to Arch Linux. For me, the transition was to learn more about Linux and to try something new. Thus far, I’m really liking Arch. There have been a few issues that have popped up here and there, like getting Bluetooth devices to connect properly, but the Arch Wiki and forums often have the solution. You just have to spend time reading the articles or the forum responses.
As for other distros, I’ve tried Zorin, Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Pop OS, and KDE Neon before settling on Linux Mint.
Montagge, Puppy Linux
AntiX
UNY0N, I used Ubuntu for a few years, and always felt that it works well and was super easy to set up. But it also seemed to use a lot of disk space. This was of course not ubuntu‘s fault, but my inexperience. But I never had to look under the hood, so I didn’t, and I ended up installing a bunch pf bloat, some of which ended up causing minor issues eventually.
I decided to try arch, and get more into configuration and learning linux. It was quite a ride, and I am happy to have gone through with it. I’m still learning, but I have so much more knowledge & control over what the PC does and how it does it. I also have a lot more room for games and such.
AlijahTheMediocre, (edited ) Arch\Endeavor, I more preferred the polished experience of Fedora Silverblue and Debian\Mint.
recarsion, Gentoo because while it was fun to try I sure as hell won’t be waiting around for my stuff to compile.
Bleach7297, Ubuntu, after the third consecutive release that broke previously working hardware. That was a while ago and I haven’t tried it recently, but given snap I’m not really inclined to.
callyral, Manjaro. Probably because I tried it with GNOME which isn’t for me either.
Caboose12000, anything with GNOME or xfce. modern cinnamon is ok ig but KDE plasma just makes anything bearable for me
NixDev, Garuda. Looked pretty and tried it for a day or two and noped out. Went back to Manjaro before I figured out how to install Arch without the installer
library_napper, Gentoo. But it took a few years
Stillhart, Garuda. I tried it because it’s supposed to be “gamer” oriented. I thought it meant it would make it easier/smoother for gaming. What they actually meant was it felt like being locked inside a gaming PC with flashing and spinning RGB lights everywhere. No fucking thanks.
Polyester6435, (edited ) All of them except arch. It just strikes the perfect balance between being easy to pick up after a bit of reading and keeping its simplicity. Paired with vanilla gnome its uwu gang. I also looked at manjaro and stayed well clear of that, vanilla is so much simpler as I don’t have to worry about conflicts caused by man jar roe randomly holding back packages for no reason.
recursive_recursion, Ubuntu, felt like I was being treated like a child with the lack of user customizability
then I chose to jump directly into Arch Linux🙃 and saw despair from analysis paralysis, somehow I learned Arch in just a month tho🤷♀️
Add comment