Best linux distro and why?

Any distro, excluding ubuntu because im through with unity

It´s up to YOU which one is the best. Linux is individual...

This question has been asked soooo many times, why do people still ask it when the answer is obvious? Also, searching a bit for yourself may have helped too.

There's no "best distro" atm, some are better than others on certain things but there's none yet whichis pure quality. What I mean by quality is simple, GNU/Linux distros is built up by a lot of different software with different licenses and goals, I wish there was one like OpenBSD, also including GUI and such for casual users.

It´s up to YOU which one is the best. Linux is individual...

This question has been asked soooo many times, why do people still ask it when the answer is obvious? Also, searching a bit for yourself may have helped too.

Well I'm a Linux noob, so I don't think the answer is obvious.

Droid, check out my thread: http://forums.xonotic.org/showthread.php?tid=3361

I say this to all starting Linux users (I copy/paste this and make minor adjustments for each use case):

Try the following in this order, but they all of them. Remember: do not try to do things the way you did in Windows. While trialing a new Operating System - or whatever it is, you must immerse yourself in that new way of thinking entirely. Do things the way they are done in Ubuntu, for instance. Do not think WIndows. Do not look up the programs you use on Windows on Wine's AppDB. Think Linux. Do things the Linux way, and only then will you have had a complete look at an alternative OS. And if you don't like it, that's okay. Just look at it thoroughly and spend at least a week with it. This goes for anything you are switching to/from, whether an OS or a new plunger for your toilet.

Try the following in order:

• Ubuntu
  
• Kubuntu (personal favourite, as I'm a KDE fan)
  
• Linux Mint (standard edition with the "Cinnamon" desktop - skip the rest)
  
• Possibly Xubuntu (what I'm currently using, because my PC sucks!) and Bodhi Linux if you're into the whole lightweight thing. These are still very pretty, despite being extraordinarily lightweight.

The same question again... We have at least 2 other threads about 'what GNU/Linux distro to choose' on this forum, use the search Luke!

spoiler: I recommend openSUSE :-)

(...)

Try the following in order:

• Ubuntu
  
• Kubuntu (personal favourite, as I'm a KDE fan)
  
• Linux Mint (standard edition with the "Cinnamon" desktop - skip the rest)
  
• Possibly Xubuntu (what I'm currently using, because my PC sucks!) and Bodhi Linux if you're into the whole lightweight thing. These are still very pretty, despite being extraordinarily lightweight.

Since you have this message prepared and all, do you mind explaining this? Why are you only suggesting Ubuntu-based distros for example?

Yeah, for example Fedora it is one of the few that follows the standards


EDIT: Also in your PM you said that Debian was no good, have you changed your mind or do you simply dont know that Ububtu is basef upon Debian?

Since you have this message prepared and all, do you mind explaining this? Why are you only suggesting Ubuntu-based distros for example?

Ubuntu is simply the best supported by software vendors (steam probably coming in a few days for instance) and easiest to find help for.

the only other distro with as low a learning curve might be magea, and it has horrible package management.

Fedora has fast jpegs and not much else to offer for n00bs

arch is to difficult for new users that haven't learned the basic posix tools.

Ubuntu is simply the best supported by software vendors (steam probably coming in a few days for instance) and easiest to find help for.

When I tried Ubuntu two months ago a lot of software in their repos were out-dated, I don't know if it's a problem or just that I've got used to Arch Linux's speed of getting stuff in the repos.

the only other distro with as low a learning curve might be magea, and it has horrible package management.

Horrible package management? Please explain. Also Mageia at least follows the standards and using RPM as package format...

Fedora has fast jpegs and not much else to offer for n00bs

Hmm, I tried it when I was a "n00b" and it was no problemo, graphical installer and user-interface by default...

arch is to difficult for new users that haven't learned the basic posix tools.

Arch aren't ment for new users...

- openSUSE also follows the standards (LSB)
- I also say Ubuntu is not good (cause it tries to separate itself from all other distros)

@Droid: If Unity is the only reason you don´t want to use Ubuntu anymore you may have a look at Gnome 3 (/Shell) which can be installed using the Software Center. I think it´s very nice to work with, customisation IS THERE you only need to know that there is something like a terminal and gconf-editor/gsettings.

Getting informed about all the stuff that makes a distro is important. Don´t just say after two minutes of using a new distro "Oh, what´s that shit?", open your mind, be smart, think different. I tried KDE once ago and the first impression was not that good, but after some time getting used to it and the way it behaves I pretty much liked it.

Since you have this message prepared and all, do you mind explaining this? Why are you only suggesting Ubuntu-based distros for example?

Nothing against the others, I actually think all package managers are just about as good.

As I said: availability of packages and DE--or should I say, polish on the DE. Debian Stable still has GNOME 2 - which can look gorgeous, but out of the box it's vanilla, ugly and horrible GNOME 2. A user's first experience with Linux should be the best possible. And trust me, dazzling effects do make people come back.

As for Fedora, I don't think it's a beginner distro. It's desktop, sure, but a lot of their releases feel like they're of beta quality. The main killer though is the fact it doesn't help you get proprietary drivers and codecs easily, which. unfortunately, pragmatic people need.

I also look at other things, like if the terminal comes up during the boot process (NOT cool) or especially if you boot without a graphical server (epitome of un-coolness) and if package management is graphical (Synaptic is not very user friendly).

Last thing I look at is age; Debian, for instance is not really meant as a desktop distribution. Not only is it very hard to install (you should not need a manual to install it. Ever.), but it's also hard to find where to download it from even (they offer 4 versions, and I could never bother to figure out that jigdo thing). The main reason, though, that I avoid recommending distributions MEPIS and Debian, is because they ship with really old software. The Linux kernel in them is old, which means they lack a hell of a lot of drivers added in more recent version. But not upgrading KDE for instance is shooting yourself in the foot. KDE's release schedule means the latest 2 releases (e.g. 4.8 and 4.9) are the most stable. One just can't apply the same policy to every package in the repo. You can either QA everything or skip QA almost entirely. One way or the other. And allowing developers more freedom to publish the latest (and often more bug-free and feature-complete) versions of their software is better.

And that's why I picked what I picked in a nutshell. Though I should also mention that support resources for Ubuntu are very extensive through the many web blogs and forum posts on Ubuntu Forums that cover it from basic to advanced usage of just about any piece of software you can get on it. And that's another big factor.

Opinions.

They are different.

Period.

Nothing against the others, I actually think all package managers are just about as good.

Very strange opinion, but okey...

As I said: availability of packages and DE--or should I say, polish on the DE. Debian Stable still has GNOME 2 - which can look gorgeous, but out of the box it's vanilla, ugly and horrible GNOME 2. A user's first experience with Linux should be the best possible. And trust me, dazzling effects do make people come back.

I don't think the casual users think that the look of a distro is everything, note that still a lot of people is using XP and such which isen't really beautiful, and they are totally okey with it.

As for Fedora, I don't think it's a beginner distro. It's desktop, sure, but a lot of their releases feel like they're of beta quality. The main killer though is the fact it doesn't help you get proprietary drivers and codecs easily, which. unfortunately, pragmatic people need.

Well, neither Ubuntu or Fedora is targeted at beginners, they are general-purpose distribution aimed at a wide audience not just what you call beginners. I think distros like Linux Mint and such is more targeted at those.

I also look at other things, like if the terminal comes up during the boot process (NOT cool) or especially if you boot without a graphical server (epitome of un-coolness) and if package management is graphical (Synaptic is not very user friendly).

It's a thing that will be fixed in next Ubuntu release iirc...

Last thing I look at is age; Debian, for instance is not really meant as a desktop distribution. Not only is it very hard to install (you should not need a manual to install it. Ever.), but it's also hard to find where to download it from even (they offer 4 versions, and I could never bother to figure out that jigdo thing). The main reason, though, that I avoid recommending distributions MEPIS and Debian, is because they ship with really old software. The Linux kernel in them is old, which means they lack a hell of a lot of drivers added in more recent version. But not upgrading KDE for instance is shooting yourself in the foot. KDE's release schedule means the latest 2 releases (e.g. 4.8 and 4.9) are the most stable. One just can't apply the same policy to every package in the repo. You can either QA everything or skip QA almost entirely. One way or the other. And allowing developers more freedom to publish the latest (and often more bug-free and feature-complete) versions of their software is better.

Hard to install? It got a well made GUI installer, my grandma actually succeeded installing it almost completely by her own(not kidding). Also Debian is a general-purpose distro with Freedom as one of their goals.

Also note that he asked for the best distro, not you favorite distro....

I guess it's not too bad to have multiple "which distro" threads, as long as the topic starter posts some information about what the intended use and their own experience and skill level is. That way, you might - and probably will - end up with completely different "best" distro's for those users.

I guess it's not too bad to have multiple "which distro" threads, as long as the topic starter posts some information about what the intended use and their own experience and skill level is. That way, you might - and probably will - end up with completely different "best" distro's for those users.

Finally someone who understand!

There's no best distro for everything and anything, in some cases there is probably even distros which are equally good.

Ubuntu is simply the best supported by software vendors (steam probably coming in a few days for instance) and easiest to find help for.

Might as well use windows if that's the reason.

(...)

A user's first experience with Linux should be the best possible. And trust me, dazzling effects do make people come back.

(...)

I also look at other things, like if the terminal comes up during the boot process (NOT cool) or especially if you boot without a graphical server (epitome of un-coolness) (...)

The picture you're painting there is frightening. Why do you want to dumb things down to make the computer a black box? People need to see what their computers do; hiding this only promotes a culture of tech-illiteracy. If such unsignificant details upset people, you should ask to work on them, not on the interface.

Last thing I look at is age; Debian, for instance is not really meant as a desktop distribution. Not only is it very hard to install (you should not need a manual to install it. Ever.), but it's also hard to find where to download it from even (they offer 4 versions, and I could never bother to figure out that jigdo thing). The main reason, though, that I avoid recommending distributions MEPIS and Debian, is because they ship with really old software. The Linux kernel in them is old, which means they lack a hell of a lot of drivers added in more recent version. But not upgrading KDE for instance is shooting yourself in the foot. KDE's release schedule means the latest 2 releases (e.g. 4.8 and 4.9) are the most stable. One just can't apply the same policy to every package in the repo. You can either QA everything or skip QA almost entirely. One way or the other. And allowing developers more freedom to publish the latest (and often more bug-free and feature-complete) versions of their software is better.

Fair enough, but isn't Ubuntu very slow on updates too?

Fair enough, but isn't Ubuntu very slow on updates too?

You know, Unity and the user interface in general just got way better in 12.10. I wonder if you could get it on Arch. I'm talking about being able to install web applications from Firefox and how they integrate with the messaging menu (Facebook, Gmail, etc.), the HUD and yes, the Dash (preferably without shopping though). That on Arch = I'll be happy.

I haven't commented on your point, though, have I? Well, it is *painfully* slow. I have like 10 PPAs for faster releases and that doesn't even cover half the programs I use.

Web apps? Hmm, this keeps getting worse, first touch-interface, then inegrated advertisement(i mean the amazon ads in the hud), and now "web apps" on the desktop. I feel sad about Ubuntu...

Web apps? Hmm, this keeps getting worse, first touch-interface, then inegrated advertisement(i mean the amazon ads in the hud), and now "web apps" on the desktop. I feel sad about Ubuntu...

# apt-get remove unity-lens-shopping , and it's apparently going to stay that way. Touch interface simply doesn't work (hell, touch works better on my convertible now that I installed Arch, because I don't have two conflicting drivers trying to handle these events at the same time) the way they advertised it. On the other hand, I think web integration is actually good. GNOME is aiming for the same thing, really. Yes, Ubuntu is becoming the mainstream, hipster-unfriendly distribution, but then again, look at how much it's innovated in the past two years. Could this have been done without Canonical and serious corporate funding? I don't think so.

I would call it "look how Ubuntu have turned from GNU/Linux for human beings to GNU/Linux for Metro-lovers".

Just kidding, even if it's hard for me personally to understand how people can like these new things.

I would call it "look how Ubuntu have turned from GNU/Linux for human beings to GNU/Linux for Metro-lovers".

Just kidding, even if it's hard for me personally to understand how people can like these new things.

To be fair, yes, Unity is a little like Metro, cough, "Modern Shell". But in all fairness, it doesn't cover up the WHOLE screen if you activate the Dash on desktop monitors.

I actually have a VM with Windows 8 preview [for one school-mandated application only: Visual Basic 2008 Express] so I can compare the two experiences, and right off the bat, I find the transition between desktop mode and tablet mode Windows forces you through every time you want to access the Start menu very disruptive, and the same could be said for GNOME Shell [I guess it's time to try KDE on netbook]. I guess that's because there's too much context switching involved. In comparison, Dash seems more intuitive.

Not all changes aren't necessarily bad, even if carried out in steps rather than gradually (I guess I'm a liberal and you're a conservative, at least on this issue, lol).

Just to be sure; I did not mean to call you a metro-lover, just a joke.

Just to be sure; I did not mean to call you a metro-lover, just a joke.

Pretty spot-on, though -- it is getting strangely similar to Metro-like concepts in some places. (Even more so in Ubuntu Christian Edition, I heard: there, the Chief Executive Priest Dictator for Life put maps and an internet browser right in the dash. Now that's Metro.)