Title is quite self-explanatory, reason I wonder is because every now and then I think to myself “maybe distro X is good, maybe I should try it at some point”, but then I think a bit more and realise it kind of doesn’t make a difference - the only thing I feel kinda matters is rolling vs non-rolling release patterns.

My guiding principles when choosing distro are that I run arch on my desktop because it’s what I’m used to (and AUR is nice to have), and Debian on servers because some people said it’s good and I the non-rolling release gives me peace of mind that I don’t have to update very often. But I could switch both of these out and I really don’t think it would make a difference at all.

  • WasPentalive@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    16 days ago

    Debian/KDE because I like the way I can customize (1 panel on the left with everything) No features removed just as one gets used to them. (looking at you gnome) No breaking changes to the desktop gadget api every update (you gnome again) Nice big repo.

  • Gaxsun@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    16 days ago

    EndeavourOS. It’s the only one I tried that worked with my sound card out of the box strangely enough…

    • floo@retrolemmy.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      16 days ago

      Geez, I haven’t heard of someone running Slackware in at least 15 years. I mean, I know it’s still around, I just haven’t heard anyone say they were running it.

    • Tapionpoika@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      16 days ago

      👍🏻 Slackware was my 1st distro. It was before kernel 2.0. Now I use windowslike girly distros…

  • BeigeAgenda@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    17 days ago

    I use Devuan on my servers, changed because I was annoyed that systemd was forced on me. (I have mellowed a bit since and accept that systemd is here to stay)

    I chose Mint for my laptop, because I just want a OS that works and still gives me a taskbar. (Here I got fed up when Ubuntu switched away from gnome)

    All of them are apt based Linux because it just works and when apt shoots itself in the foot during dist upgrades you can still wrangle it back in working order.

  • JovialSodium@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    17 days ago

    Void for desktop/laptop. These are the things I like about it.

    • Rolling release
    • Initial installation is minimal, and doesn’t foist a specific DE or other unessential software on me.
    • No systemd
    • Nothing similar to Arch’s AUR. I know a lot of people it, but I do not. I mention as the distros are similar.

    Debian for my server. But I plan to migrate to Devuan.

    • Stable and well tested
    • Huge package selection
    • Pretty ubiquitously supported. If for whatever reason what you want to run isn’t in the repo, .deb packages and apt repos are often available.
    • Minimal installation available.
  • lordnikon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    17 days ago

    Debian for everything since it’s one of the few distros that has always been there. It’s one of the second distros to come after after SLS. Distros come and go, but Debian marches on.

    • aleq@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      17 days ago

      Most big distros are old enough to drink though. Ubuntu is 20yo, Fedora 21yo, openSUSE 18yo, Arch 23yo, Gentoo 23yo. (I got curious and a bit carried away…)

      But sure, Debian does have them beat by roughly 10 years (31yo).

    • Tanoh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      17 days ago

      Yepp. Started using Debian around the Ham/Slink releases, haven’t found any reason to change yet.

      • lordnikon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        17 days ago

        Oh wow yeah I started around the same time. 1998 was a magical time. I stated with a boxed copy of OG Suse but switched to Debian like 6 months later then never switched again. I learned a lot from the thick manual that came with Suse but once I tried Debian everything just clicked. It’s like you learn the Debian rules and philosophy and any package you work with makes sense.

  • RightEdofer@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    17 days ago

    Arch. Purely because of the Arch Wiki. I honestly think it’s the easiest OS to troubleshoot as long as you are willing and able to read every now and again.

    • SayCyberOnceMore@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      17 days ago

      Agree.

      Years ago, I was troubleshooting something (can’t remember what) on Ubuntu and realised the package had fixed the bug, but it wasn’t in the repos yet… like months behind.

      Looked at Arch with it’s up to date repos, moved over and never looked back.

      I’ve reported bugs since, watched the package get updated and seen the improvement on my system… now that’s what it should be like.

  • RotatingParts@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    17 days ago

    I use Kubuntu. I like the KDE desktop and I like a Debian based OS. If someone is going to make their software for Linux, it will almost certainly be available at least for Debian. If, say you want it for Arch, you need to wait for someone to put it in the AUR or build it yourself.

  • nf999@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    17 days ago

    Void linux. Both on wayland + labwc desktop and radpberrypi 4 server with multiple dockers, and a bootable usb for my work laptop. Why? Its lightweight, rolling, rock stable, and easily extendable. I love runit for its simplicity. Love xbps package manager for its speed, and love the good and clear documentation.

  • poinck@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    17 days ago

    Gentoo for my workstation because I need flexibility, security and stability there and Debian stable for my Raspberries running all the services I need 24/7 access to.

    I don’t like all the spin-offs of the major distros. And no, Ubuntu is not a major distro it is based on Debian and they are known for some really bad decisions in past and present, eg: snap instead of flatpak.

  • Shertson@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    17 days ago

    Fedora. I’ve been using it since Fedora Core 1 and was mostly RedHat before that. I don’t have time to muck around with my desktop and Fedora almost always just works. I’ve had too many problems with Ubuntu and Suse and friends. And while I like Arch and Debian and others, I just want my desktop to be point and click. My days off tinkering on my desktop are long gone. Kids, house, work, wife, grandkids, other hobbies keep me busy. I save tinkering for my selfhosting adventures.

  • MrErr@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    17 days ago

    Long time user of Fedora. Tried Ubuntu but came back to Fedora. But now almost migrated to Almalinux. For software app, use flatpak, which has the latest and no library dependencies. Using Wayland too on Almalinux. So not missing anything since moving to away from Fedora to Almalinux.

  • MXX53@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    17 days ago

    Fedora strikes a good balance for me. I come from arch and opensuse. I like the stability of fedora, but I like that it also gets updates faster than Debian. Most software I have found has Fedora considerations.

    However, I have been using Ubuntu LTS for my self hosted media server.

  • buffysummers@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    17 days ago

    I use Fedora. No real reason in particular (I do like yum/dnf a lot), I just think it’s neat.

    I’ve used Arch in the past as well.