When I convicted my dad to switch to Linux it’s what I’ve given him, and he’s been very happy with it, so I guess it’s just that it isn’t a pain for a noob and it works a lot like windows
I haven’t used mint in a while but did for a few years. The out of the box experience (at that time) was better.
Article from 2011:
Linux Mint 11 is a very respectable and speedy distribution and is comparatively very media friendly and easy to use out of the box for newcomers. These qualities likely have contributed to the operating system’s place on the Top 5 Linux Distribution list.
Take a hugely popular distro which alienates some some users with some issues or unappealing GUI choices, Mint comes along and polishes it further and you end up with a distro that is just perfect for that niche.
I think quite a few Ubuntu users migrated to KUbuntu or Mint when Canonical made Unity the default (in Ubuntu 11.04).
I remember trying Ubuntu Unity, back when I was wondering if I could be a good idea to switch Linux. But I had no patience at the time for the buttons on the opposite side of the window. I can't stop thinking that if it wasn't for that, things could have been quite different.
The best thing about Mint used to be not spending time adding nonfree software and media codecs. I don’t know whether it is still has that advantage over ubuntu.
My anecdote, granted I’m no Linux master: I recently went into a distro rigamarole, installed openSUSE, Manjaro, etc, before arriving to Mint, because I could not find one that handled my CPU and graphics and drivers setup without significant effort.
Then I installed Mint (avoiding Ubuntu and its Canonicalness), and setup was very simple and everything worked out of the box. I could run Steam with external GPU without going through many workarounds or setup using nvidia prime and launchers and so forth
Stylistically I also like cinnamon, but Mint mainly was just so low hassle and simple I have to give it props for that
It’s just the easiest distro to get into coming from windows/mac. It’s more lenient about the third party/closed source software that people might be familiar with, lots of GUI tools including the Software Center that makes it easy to install things, and plenty of flavors to suit whatever feels most natural to you. It’s got a nice GUI installer and live version that is sure to make people feel more comfortable about installing an OS if they’ve never done it before, and it’s not at all fussy about the hardware it runs on. It’s also rock solid as far as I’ve experienced. And, of course, it has the benefit of accessing the huge amount of software that supports debian. Also, owing to its popularity, the community is very active and welcoming to newbies.
When I was first getting into Linux, I was definitely more experimental and tried out Fedora just to get as far from Windows as I could. Now I’m not so adventurous and just want something that provides as similar a workflow as possible to the workflow I have to use at work with windows. So it goes that, when setting up a new laptop where I want an OS that just works, I reach for Linux Mint.
Software install tool on Mint is so much faster and more intuitive than the abomination I’m using on Nobara. I appreciate their efforts to make a gaming distro and I recommend it but if you want polish and more GUI tools, Mint works.
Long time Mint user here. Switched to them ages ago because they didn’t try to “revolutionize” the desktop in the whole Gnome 3/Ubuntu Unity era, and the OS was close enough to Ubuntu that instructions and software for Ubuntu would run on it. Since then, it’s only been getting better, and they haven’t been accumulating drama (Snap, telemetry, whatever Redhat is doing, etc.). like the more popular distros have been.
I’d recommend it to new people because it Just Works, has flatpack support, is similar enough to Windows and the many Ubuntu-specific instructions in the wild apply to it.
Agreed. I was recently prepping a laptop to give to my mom, and planned to put Ubuntu on it since, y'know, it's "linux for human beings". I hadn't used Ubuntu Desktop in years, and was blown away by how unintuitive everything felt in the GUI. nothing behaved how I expected (this isn't to say it is inherently bad; this is just my experience).
Tried Linux Mint XFCE instead and was instantly relieved that it was a similar user experience to Windows (since that's typically going to make things easier for beginners).
It's also my go-to distro if I have a machine lying around that's in-between tasks and just needs a general-purpose OS for the moment.
Distrowatch's source for popularity is how often the different distros are clicked on on their own homepage... which has the toplist featured prominantly on the start page.
So their ranking completely and utterly worthless, as it's prone to manipulation and once you basically pushed your distro to the high spots it's guaranteed to stay there as a rarely used but highly rated distro is of course attracting more clicks from people wanting to know what it's actually about... see: MX Linux being on their #1 spot forever.
Its insanely popular on distrowatch. I also don’t know why
Distrowatch counts clicks on Distrowatch. People using methods like setting the distro page as new tab page or perhaps even use scripts to boost awareness of obscure distributions is a regular occurrence. Nobody can seriously tell me that PCLinuxOS having been on the top of the DW charts for a long time (it’s still ahead of Kubuntu, Genoo, and RHEL) is because of how freaking popular that thing is. I’m also very doubtful of the current popularity of MX Linux over there. No way on earth is that seriously 2.5 times more popular than Ubuntu.
Yeah I’m with you. In my case I can’t get around the cinamon gui which … reminds me of Windows 98, sorry :(
(yes, I know, calm down, I know I can install whichever interface I want but from my experience it just causes problems and at that point I might aswell just switch the distro)
It has all the goodness of Ubuntu without the noise. A common sense UI with solid default options and great customizability.
I have tried a lot of different distros and Mint is the one I keep coming back to. I run it on my daily driver laptop, my gaming rig and my media center in the living room with MythTV. Could not be happier.
Counterpoint, Ubuntu is popular because it usually has what you need. For home stuff especially the limiting factor is usually time, not processing power.
I’d challenge that asking what do you really need above base Debian?
I’ve got a script to set up my debian servers and it doesn’t include much beyond adding docker, assigning users to groups, and adding a couple tools (just looked them up: sudo ca-certificates curl gnupg ufw).
I saw a significant decrease in idle CPU and RAM load by switching from Ubuntu-server to Debian Bookworm + those tools.
Anyone who bashes distros hasn't really understood Linux. The fact that you can choose gives us the ability to choose the right tool for the job. Ubuntu has pushed a few weird things into the Linux world, but the distro itself is still legit.
I just use whatever that does the job. Sometimes I switch to systemd free distros just to know what it’s like (currently checking out dinit version of Artix)
I think most of the discrimination arises from a way of thinking which puts minimalism, simplicity and speed as the first priority and starts a unhealthy obsession over it. Sometimes keeping things too minimal can require more work than doing the actual work. This can also be seen in people who rave about WMs vs DEs and Wayland vs X.
Oh and I use XFCE btw. I feel like that’s the DE which gives me enough control over everything while not bombarding me with a truck ton of settings. I started using DEs again because I was spending all my time ricing away with window managers (and none of my rices were not even that good).
I sure love journalctl -u taking five second to give me ten lines of logs. Which I have to use because older, more robust services got replaced by default and the replacements got tightly integrated into everything else making it a pain to switch back, AND these replacement exhibits all the flaws that were fixed in older solutions.
Granted, this will only improve going forward, but why reinvent everything just to put systemd- in front of the name.
That’s actually a fair point, though I still think systemd does it in a way that’s both too obfuscated and too proprietary, which preferences tying everything to itself rather than being able to work alongside and integrate smoothly with other tools that already exist.
It feels a bit like change for change sake at times… I know there are underlying reasons, but it breaks too many of the core philosophies of *NIX for my taste
linuxmemes
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.