So, you’re new to Linux? Welcome to our community!

You probably ask yourself

“Where should I start?”

and feel a bit overwhelmed right now.

In this guide, I will show you how to choose your first Linux distro.

This is part of my “New to Linux?”-series, where I will guide you through your first weeks.

TL;DR: If you don’t care about this at all, just go for Linux Mint.

As you’ve probably already heard, “Linux” isn’t just an operating system by itself, it’s just the engine of it.
You need stuff built around that to get a working desktop. That “stuff” is packaged and distributed, hence the name “distro” (distribution).
Everyone can package this stuff themselfes and make their own operating system.
There are literally hundreds or thousands of different Linux-based OSs out there, and as a newcomer, this choice can be very overwhelming.

This is why you’ve already came here and asked for advice.
Don’t worry, we’ve all been there!

You can find the “right” one for you if you follow the flow chart.
The flow chart is complementary to the text here. The diagram is for the choice, while the text is more for general information about each distro.

Every distro of the following recommended ones meets all of these criteria:

  • Easy to understand and intuitive to use
  • You don’t have to use the command line
  • Works reliable
  • Supports Nvidia-GPUs

Choosing the DE

Before you choose your distro, you should choose your prefered desktop environment (DE).
The DE is what defines the user interface and some core apps, so, basically, what you interact with.
Don’t mainly choose the distro because of its’ DE, you can change that later too if you really want.

The two main DEs (Gnome and KDE) are listed in the flow chart.

KDE

  • is very modular and configurable, you can turn it into whatever you want.
  • has pretty much everything you can imagine already built in

Gnome

  • Is more opinionated, but if you don’t like its’ unique workflow, you can turn it into a “classic” desktop with minimize/ maximize buttons, task bar, and more, too.
  • You can use the Extension manager/ Gnome Tweaks for doing that or getting other functionalities like smartphone integration for example.

If you like certain aspects of one, but others from the “competitor”, you can more or less turn one into the other. You have maximum freedom!

#Differences between distros

**Choose your distro based on the following key points: **

  • Release schedule: Some get new features very often, some only once a few years. We refer this as stagnation as “stability” (not to conflict with reliability!)
  • Philosophy: What are key values of the distro? (e.g. just providing a well functioning set of software, no matter if it’s proprietary; conservative vs. innovative; etc.)
  • Base: Many distros are based on other ones. A very common base is Debian or Ubuntu, where many newcomer-guides are based on. It mainly determines what package manager you use in the command line. I personally think that’s not as important, since you will use the Software Center anyway most of the time to download apps and updates.
  • All other things, like big community, good track record, hardware support, etc., were already taken care of by me.

So, here’s the list of every distro shown in the flow chart, with a short description on why it is included.

Linux Mint

It’s THE recommendation for every newcomer, no matter where you look. Not without reason:

  • Very sane defaults
  • Works, just out-of-the-box
  • Not too many, but just the right amount of pre-installed apps to get in touch with the Linux app ecosystem
  • Simple, yet highly functional
  • Hides all “advanced” features in a reasonable way
  • Huge userbase, especially for beginners. More experienced users still use Mint, and are always there to help newcomers.
  • Doesn’t change much, only gets more polished. New features arrive occasionally, but they usually don’t change your workflow radically.
  • Feels very familiar when you came from Windows, which most people do.

Website: https://www.linuxmint.com/

ZorinOS

It is the main “competitor” of Mint right now.
The big difference between Mint and it is how the desktop looks. While Mint is more old-fashioned in how it looks, Zorin wants to be an eye pleaser by looking more modern. With it, you can choose between different “styles”, that mimic the looks of Windows 7, Windows 11, MacOS, and more, depending on what you feel the most comfortable with.
It has a slow release schedule of ~3 years, with some minor polishes in between, which is great if you don’t like change.

Don’t worry about the “Pro” and “Light” versions. This is not like a freeware app with ads and stuff.

  • “Pro” refers to the paid version, that only differs in some extra styles you can choose from. With the payment you get some extra tech assistance and support the developers.
  • “Light” is a lightweight version, that is made for old devices to give them a second life and make them perform better than before, while still looking good.

Website: https://zorin.com/os/

VanillaOS

This one is also very promising. It has the same philosophy as Mint, but implements it differently.
It works a bit different under the hood and ensures an always working system you can’t brick. If you still fucked up something, or got a bad update somehow, you can just roll back in seconds.
It also updates itself in the background and applies the updates without the user noticing on the next reboot, without any waiting time (unlike the forced Windows updates).

If you become more advanced and experienced over time, you can turn to the terminal and have access to literally any app that was ever made for Linux. Especially if you start using Linux as developer, this is very handy.
Even if you aren’t a developer, no, even if you aren’t techy at all, VanillaOS is a very good choice if you prefer the simplicity and ease of use of Mint, but want something more modern!

Website: https://vanillaos.org/

[Disclaimer: The new release, VanillaOS 2 Orchid, is currently under very high developement and still in beta. Consider waiting until the new version is officially released for a garanteed smooth experience.]

Fedora

This one is not exactly (but comparably) as beginner oriented as the above are, but still, a very good choice for new users. Fedora is often considered “the new Ubuntu”, and is one of the most used distros out there with a gigantic community.
It is community-owned, but supported by the money and development power of the biggest player in the commercial Linux world.

Features:

  • Comes with any major DE you want + huge software availability
  • Balanced desktop release schedule of 6 months. This ensures both a modern and reliable desktop system
  • Everything is pretty vanilla (no theming, etc.) and has very sane defaults
  • No big collection of pre-installed software (e.g. Office), bit it is installable with one click in the software center.
  • Future-oriented: as soon as a new promising technology is reliable enough, it will adopt it.

Website:
https://fedoraproject.org/
https://fedoraproject.org/workstation/
https://fedoraproject.org/spins/kde/

Fedora Atomic

Fedora Atomic is a variant of Fedora that works different under the hood, while behaving the same on the surface as the regular Fedora does. I don’t want to get too technical here, but the pros are the same as the ones from VanillaOS (unbrickable, better security, no half applied updates, etc.).

I’m not sure if I would recommend it over the normal Fedora right now, as due to the other inner workings, you might have the chance to encounter issues when trying to get things working, e.g. an install script you found online.
If you are leaning bit more towards a tech-savy-person and have no problem searching a small thing here and there (only when you need non-ordinary stuff), then definitely check it out. Especially if you already came from another distro and feel dissatisfied.

BUT, keep following in mind:

  • If you are just a casual user, you don’t need the terminal for this distro. If you want to really make full use of it tho, you might have to use it from time to time.
  • On the surface, it looks and behaves exactly like the normal Fedora.
  • Compatibility is not fully given, due to the double edged nature of the said new technology.
  • Those potential issues or cons sound more dramatic than they are. If you are a normal user, you won’t encounter these. Even I never had any compatibility-issues and always got everything working.

One of the coolest things about it, apart from the pros mentioned above, are:

  • Most “hidden” parts of the OS are irrelevant now to you if you want to change something -> simpler structure
  • You can “swap out” the OS with something different any time you want, while also keeping your data (pictures, games, etc.). If you want to switch your DE for example later on, you can do that very easily by just changing the selected spin. This even works in the extend of rebasing to almost another distro!

uBlue

If you are interested now, then check out UniversalBlue instead of the “official” Silverblue or Kinoite. uBlue offers:

  • Many different variants of this distro, but with some quality-of-life changes included.
  • Custom builds for special hardware, e.g. Microsoft Surface devices, ASUS ROG, etc., which come working OOTB, are very reliable and don’t require tinkering.
  • And also special variants for different tastes and use cases, e.g. a security-enhanced variant, as well as

Bazzite

which is one of the biggest and “best” example in how awesome uBlue can be. It’s derived from it and is a gaming-focused distro. With it, you get many optimization tweaks and tools for gaming included out of the box, like some performance enhancements for example.

You don’t need a gaming distro to play games at all, but if that’s what you mostly do with your PC, then maybe consider that.

Links:
https://fedoraproject.org/atomic-desktops/silverblue/
https://universal-blue.org/installation/
https://bazzite.gg

Arch and NixOS

Those two are in the “pain” category. I would never recommend them to anyone starting with Linux, for example because they’re fed up with Windows.
Both Arch and NixOS are known to be “for experts only”, meaning, they’re

  • high demanding
  • hard to set up and use
  • requiring the user to be skilled and to know what he’s doing
  • don’t hold the users’ hand
  • and don’t tolerate user error well.

Why did I still decide to include them in my noob-recommended list anyway? Well, because not everyone wants to start Linux expecting an easy road. There are some people who want to tinker and challenge themselfes, and some birds learn flying the best when kicked out of the nest.

Don’t get me wrong! Both Arch and NixOS are fantastic choices and very powerful. They can be fun to use and very rewarding.

What makes them great?

  • Minimalism: they come with basically nothing out of the box and require the user to set up everything themselfes. If you’ve done that, you have an OS that’s truly yours!
  • Skilled community and great wiki. Especially the Arch-wiki is the number-one-ressource for any Linux thing, and by the point you installed Arch or NixOS the hard way, you got a good understanding in the inner workings of Linux.
  • Rolling release: as soon as packages are released, you get them, no big release versions
  • Biggest package repositories ever, with many inofficial ones too, created by the user base
  • Great package manager

Alternatives

If those pro-points of Arch and NixOS are appealing to you, but sound too hard to get for your taste, here are some alternatives you may consider instead. They aren’t my top pick, but still very popular in the community.

  • Debian: One of the oldest distros ever out there. It’s what a lot of other distros, including Mint, Ubuntu, Zorin, and more, are based on. It’s stable (the normal version at least), very flexible (supports many CPU architectures) and minimalist (if you want).
  • OpenSuse Tumbleweed/ Slowroll: Rolling release like Arch, but with a bigger safety net behind
  • EndeavourOS: Very sane Arch-distro that’s already set up for you

Other honorable mentions

Pop!_OS

Also gets recommended often. A popular distro for everyone who likes the coherence of Gnome, but doesn’t like the opinionated workflow and more features like tiling. Good Ubuntu alternative, especially for gaming.

  • Made by a hardware manufacturer.
  • Based on Ubuntu/ Debian.
  • Currently a bit outdated. The devs are focusing on their self-developed new DE that’s coming soon. I would go for Fedora (general use) or Bazzite (gaming) and add the tweaks myself via extensions when needed.
    Still a viable option.

MX Linux

  • Great for older devices with non-optimal performance.

TuxedoOS

  • Best Debian/ Ubuntu-based distro with KDE.
  • Also made by a hardware manufacturer.
  • ipsirc@lemmy.mlEnglish
    481·
    9 months ago

    Everyone should choose their first distro based on what his friend/neighbor uses already. Direct support can’t be beaten.

    • Guenther_Amanita@feddit.deOPEnglish
      122·
      9 months ago

      Great advice! That’s why I will also install Fedora Silverblue or VanillaOS on my mums’ laptop in the future. Currently, I put Mint on hers, because she is older and I thought she might prefer having something that reminds her of “the good ol’ days”. But I find myself needing to google stuff she could have searched for herself, because I also don’t know how to fix it.

      Sure, I could resort to the terminal, but I want her to see how I do things to let her fix them herself in the future if the need arises.

  • atzanteol@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    271·
    9 months ago

    Good effort but… Why is Debian “for grandpa’s” now? Do you not know that you can install KDE and other DEs on Pop (and most other distros)? Why is the terminal treated like some dark and arcane device only to be used by “the old ones”? Ubuntu left off just because you don’t like snaps regardless of the fact that it has a huge user base and tons of documentation and user support forums?

    Leave out the immutables, rolling distros like Arch and other small community distros - there lie dragons. If somebody wants that pain they will seek it out themselves. You’re just muddying the water with that. Then stick to ones you get good hits from Google with “my sound isn’t working on distro name”.

    Also - maybe start by explaining what a distro is? Mostly that they’re the same basic libraries packaged differently. beginners sometimes don’t even know whether they can run the same things on each. Like - yes you can play the same games on mint and fedora.

    I would explain desktop environments separately - they are typically the most confusing thing to Linux newbies. e.g. that you can often choose between them on the same distro. And that they can even be installed at the same time and chosen on login so people can experiment. A true “newb” will often not even recognize that the DE isn’t the os itself.

    I would avoid the phrase “beginner friendly” as 1) it makes it seem like it may be limited compared to others and 2) is too vague. “Easy to install and use” and “have a good community for support” are better metrics to judge by and are what beginners want.

    Ubuntu needs to be here for this to be serious. I run pop and will Google “how to X on Ubuntu” because it’ll return more hits. Finding support is a huge part of why you pick one distro over another.

    • Guenther_Amanita@feddit.deOPEnglish
      143·
      9 months ago

      Why is Debian “for grandpa’s” now?

      You misunderstood that point. It’s not that Debian is for grandpas, it’s that Debian is the cool grandpa! ;)
      It’s one of the oldest distros available out there (in terms of how long it has already existed), and everybody likes it. Just read my post, and you’ll notice that I’ve never spoken badly about it.

      Do you not know that you can install KDE and other DEs on Pop (and most other distros)?

      I do, but the DE is one of the main selling points of a lot of distros. For example, in what main aspect would you say TuxedoOS differs from Mint? Right, in terms of the DE.
      Of course you can change it, but when you do that for example in Mint, you loose most of the great things that distro does. It also feels “dirty”. You can do that, sure, but if there are a dozen “different” distros, that only differ mainly from their DE-optimization, then choose it based on that. Nothing wrong with that.
      If you already decided for a distro (e.g. Fedora) and want to change the DE further down the road, you can do that, but it might be messy.

      Why is the terminal treated like some dark and arcane device only to be used by “the old ones”?

      Because it appears frightening and “hacky” for new users. Using the terminal from time to time to change very deep settings under the hood is fine for most people, but if you need to open the terminal for any trivial task it ruins the user experience.

      Ubuntu left off just because you don’t like snaps regardless of the fact that it has a huge user base and tons of documentation and user support forums?

      Yes. While Snaps became better in the last years, they still bring a lot of trouble. Just, for example, think of Valve when they officially recommended everyone to not use the fricking Snap package because it’s broken all the time? Good luck doing that with Ubuntu, when they shove Snaps down everyones’ throat, without even notifying the user.
      While we more experienced users just change the package format, newcomers aren’t aware of that and blame a malfunctioning app to Linux, not the Snap.

      I just don’t see any reasons to recommend Ubuntu over something like Mint or even Debian. Both are pretty much the same (same command compatibility with apt, documentation also applies to them, etc.), but just better in any aspect.

      Leave out the immutables, rolling distros like Arch and other small community distros

      Immutables have their place, especially VanillaOS. They maintain themselfes automatically, make the system way less complicated (because you never come into touch with anything outside of /var/ anyway) and are perfectly fine for most people by just installing Flatpaks.

      Arch is only there because people wanted it to be in my previous post where I asked, and they argued that not everyone wants a easy “Windows-replacement and just works”-experience. Some are here because they want to learn and tinker. And for that, NixOS and Arch are ideal, with the big disclaimer.

      I would explain desktop environments separately - they are typically the most confusing thing to Linux newbies. e.g. that you can often choose between them on the same distro. And that they can even be installed at the same time and chosen on login so people can experiment. A true “newb” will often not even recognize that the DE isn’t the os itself.

      I did briefly, but that would be too confusing. I don’t recommend installing many DEs side by side, as this will cause many problems and inconsistencies.

      I would avoid the phrase “beginner friendly” as 1) it makes it seem like it may be limited compared to others and 2) is too vague. “Easy to install and use” and “have a good community for support” are better metrics to judge by and are what beginners want.

      That’s what I did in the beginning?

      Every distro of the following recommended ones meets all of these criteria:

      • Easy to understand and intuitive to use
      • You don’t have to use the command line
      • Works reliable
      • Supports Nvidia-GPUs

      I still thank you for your critique and upvoted it because it might add value to this discussion :)

      • Infynis@midwest.socialEnglish
        3·
        9 months ago

        I don’t recommend installing many DEs side by side

        What does this mean? I was looking at Bazzite, and choosing the DE was the first step after telling it what hardware you want to build it on

        • Guenther_Amanita@feddit.deOP
          3·
          9 months ago

          I meant with that that installing many DEs side by side, e.g. Gnome + KDE on top of Cinnamon on Mint, would result in many clashes.

          They all use different design components and often share the same configuration, resulting in a very messy and broken looking desktop.

          I personally always knew I can just install another DE and delete the old one, but still just reinstalled, because it’s cleaner.

          • Infynis@midwest.socialEnglish
            2·
            9 months ago

            Oh, I didn’t even consider that that would be something you could do. Why would you want two desktops?

            • Russ@bitforged.spaceEnglish
              1·
              9 months ago

              I like installing various DEs every now and then to see how they’re doing, and if their workflow matches up with what I’d expect. Right now I have KDE as my main, GNOME, and Hyprland (not a DE technically but…) all installed.

              However, you do have to be careful as like the OP mentioned it can be a bit annoying, KDE and GNOME tend to overwrite each other’s settings, for example in Nautilus it displays the Breeze icon theme - I can switch it, but then Dolphin will display the Adwaita icon theme. The workaround for this in specific is to use a third party icon pack, so that it doesn’t look out of place on either side.

              Additionally, any GTK apps now use the GTK theme instead of the Breeze-GTK theme, so Firefox in KDE has GNOME-like toolbars which I have no problem with, but others might. You can of course switch it, but then it’ll look really out of place in GNOME.

              Still much easier for me than reinstalling everything all over again, only to then decide “actually, I don’t want to use GNOME” and then reinstall again however.

    • Infynis@midwest.socialEnglish
      8·
      9 months ago

      I would explain desktop environments separately

      As someone that is a total newbie, I would definitely appreciate this. It’s the first option to select lol

  • TCB13@lemmy.worldEnglish
    315·
    9 months ago

    TL;DR: If you just care about having something that works reliably then install Debian + GNOME + Software as Flatpaks. You’ll get a rock solid system with the latest software.

    About the desktop environment: the “what you go for it’s entirely your choice” mantra when it comes to DE is total BS. What happens is that you’ll find out while you can use any DE in fact GNOME will provide a better experience because most applications on Linux are design / depend on its components. Using KDE or XFCE is fun until you run into some GTK/libadwaita application and small issues start to pop here and there, windows that don’t pick on your theme or you just created a Frankenstein of a system composed of KDE + a bunch of GTK components.

    • Guenther_Amanita@feddit.deOP
      173·
      9 months ago

      Good advice!
      I personally think tho, that Debian isn’t the best beginner distro.
      Not, because it’s not user friendly or something, but more because of the complicated and unintuitive installer.

      Take Mint or Zorin for example, where you basically only need to click “next next” and it’s installed, and after that, you get a wonderful first start wizard where everything gets explained (how to download new apps, get updates, etc.).

      I had a lot of issues when installing Debian after some days, because of a non-optimal suggested partitioning layout, misconfigured mirror-server list or network for example.
      But once it’s running, it’s very solid!

      As I mentioned in the post, Debian (+ Flatpaks) is a great choice, but I’d recommend something else as a base tbh.

      My personal choice is Fedora Atomic, because of the reliability of the host system and the good balance between stability and moderness. Debian is a bit too stable (too old/ stale) for my own taste, but I respect everyone who likes that.

      I’m a Gnome fanboy personally too, but not everyone likes it.
      I’ve heard very often from other users, that they always thought Gnome is the Linux DE and didn’t get warm with Linux in general because of that.
      And when they discovered KDE/ another DE, they instantly fell in love and never looked back.

      In my opinion, GTK apps look way better on KDE than Qt apps do on Gnome. On KDE, they integrate a bit better due to theming, but look slightly off.
      Qt on Gnome on the other hand is almost unusable.
      But both improved.

      Still, thank you for your addition!

      • Flaky@iusearchlinux.fyiEnglish
        61·
        9 months ago

        GNOME should at least support colour schemes, in my opinion. If they don’t want theming, they can at least do that. In any case, Gradience can help with getting a coherent colour scheme on non-GNOME/libadwaita environments, and if the user is just using Breeze, they already have a Breeze colour scheme available. It’s available as a Flatpak.

      • pmk@lemmy.sdf.org
        5·
        9 months ago

        Honest question, what is unintuitive about the Debian installer? I’m asking because I’ve done it so many times that it’s intuitive for me.

        • Guenther_Amanita@feddit.deOPEnglish
          41·
          9 months ago

          @TCB13@lemmy.world @pmk@lemmy.sdf.org Maybe the installer isn’t bad, and I’m probably just dumb. You aren’t the only ones saying this, so maybe not Debian, but me is the problem.

          • pmk@lemmy.sdf.org
            2·
            9 months ago

            Well there’s something about it that is confusing compared to other installers? For example there is a text message instructing the users what happens if they don’t set a root password. Many people miss it, but it’s right there. If many people miss it, there’s something that can be improved.

        • claymore@pawb.social
          31·
          9 months ago

          Not unintuitive, but thinking about it from a beginner standpoint, calamares-based systems are way easier to ‘get’. These distros don’t ask for domain names, proxies, usage surveys etc. This stuff isn’t that complicated, but they add an extra level of things you need to worry about if you’ve never used Linux before, which is the kind of person who this flow chart is made for.

      • TCB13@lemmy.worldEnglish
        3·
        9 months ago

        I had a lot of issues when installing Debian after some days, because of a non-optimal suggested partitioning layout, misconfigured mirror-server list or network for example.

        For what’s worth I never had those kinds of issues with the Debian installer, to me it seems that anyone capable of installing Windows 10/11 is capable of installing Debian on the bases of “next > next > next” everything as defaults and will get to a working desktop.

        I’ve seen a few people complaining about the Debian installer but I never had issues at all. From servers to laptops always seems to get things right for me.

  • LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    221·
    9 months ago

    No mention of Debian as the main and default option? Come on now. Debian with Gnome or even Ubuntu with Gnome are just as good as Mint.

    • _edge@discuss.tchncs.de
      9·
      9 months ago

      This also surprised me. The Debian platform has been terrific over decades, at least for me.

      My journey was

      • SuSe (yast, compiling kernels, configuring X, …, good for learning, but not good for productivity)
      • Red Hat (free at the time)
      • Debian (still compiling kernels)
      • Debian (with kernel and modules via apt; and working X11, heaven)
      • Ubuntu (Debian for Desktops)
      • Ubuntu (why would i ever install another distro?)
      • Ubuntu (okay, any other distro would do, but why?)
      • Ubuntu (snap, Wayland, … okay i’m too old to understand this, but if it works?)

      Are Mint or Pop_OS better than Ubuntu or Debian? In what way?

      • Guenther_Amanita@feddit.deOP
        4·
        9 months ago

        Are Mint or Pop_OS better than Ubuntu or Debian? In what way?

        I think yes, but not extremely much, mainly because they’ve added some stuff, like welcome wizards, additional easy access and pre-configured software, and more.

        I think Debian is a very very solid and good distro, but I think the first impression could be better for newcomers.

        Honestly, if one more person says I should also include Ubuntu or or recommend Debian more, I will. Ubuntu not that much, but Debian, why not? If you all think it should be there, it definitely has its place.

        • comicallycluttered@beehaw.org
          2·
          9 months ago

          So, I don’t know if you’re aware, but Debian has live CDs/USBs with the same Calamares installer that so many other distros use. Pick any of the eight different DE ISOs and the installation process is identical to that of… pretty much everything.

          It’s all preconfigured (to the point where some might say there’s a bit of bloat) and there’s no need to go messing around with the more complicated stuff (although I’m not certain if it requires enabling the non-free repo separately or offers it on installation; that would be the only major issue).

          My only problem with that installation method is that the default partition setup sticks with the traditional “half your RAM size” swap space, which I think is annoying. But if someone doesn’t know or care about what swap is, there’s no real problem with it.

  • wuphysics87@lemmy.ml
    20·
    9 months ago

    While I appreciate the post, and, organized as it may be, it runs afoul of every post like it. It is too much choice and too much information. No amount of formatting will change that. If you want people to switch to Linux make the choice for them. They don’t want to choose.

      • Tak@lemmy.ml
        1·
        9 months ago

        Can I ask why you say that?

        (I realize that’s ironic considering the theme of this thread, I just enjoy learning from people who have passion for something)

        • fine_sandy_bottom@discuss.tchncs.de
          2·
          9 months ago

          Because the vast majority of users don’t or won’t care about the distro.

          For almost all intents and purposes they’re the same. They do the same thing, you can install the same things, they all work great out of the box and can be configured to work in whatever way.

          This thread is talking about choice of distro as though it’s like choosing a car, like it says something about your personality or useful for different things. Do you want a 4x4? A truck? Something sporty? Red or Kermit Green? It’s not like that at all, it’s more like what engine oil you put in your car. There are different types but the vast majority of people just won’t ever notice the difference. Of course, there are some specific uses that might make a particular type of engine oil a better choice, but people engaging in those uses will already know their specific requirements.

          The best distro for any newbie will be, the one their friend or neighbour uses, or any of the top 5 on distrowatch.com.

          • Tak@lemmy.ml
            1·
            9 months ago

            This has always been my opinion on distros as I don’t really like to switch distros and prefer to use one that just works. I used to be more into Redhat and that’s kinda soured for me.

  • MxM111@kbin.social
    18·
    9 months ago

    What happened with Ubuntu? I tried Linux once, like 15 years ago, and Ubuntu just worked.

    • Guenther_Amanita@feddit.deOP
      264·
      9 months ago

      Ubuntu has become very controversial.

      It used to be good and paved the way of today’s Linux desktop world, but nowadays, the Corporation behind it, Canonical, decided to shit on its user base.

      • Once, they decided to make advertisements for Amazon a few years ago, which they’ve reverted
      • They now make ads in the terminal for “Ubuntu Pro”
      • And, mostly, they force their own and highly controversial package format (Snaps) onto users. You almost can’t get around them, even if you actively decide for it.

      If you want something non-BS, use Mint or Fedora.

      • EfreetSK@lemmy.world
        4·
        9 months ago

        Yeah, well maybe you should put this into your graph as a choice. You might not like it but Ubuntu still has a major support for anything Linux related. Any manufacturer or software development - if they support Linux, there is a high chance that they mean basically Ubuntu, quite often they tested it just there. This is a HUGE advantage for any beginner.

        Beginners don’t care about behind the curtain stuff, they just want things to work. And you might not like Canonical but Ubuntu does this

        • Guenther_Amanita@feddit.deOPEnglish
          5·
          9 months ago

          Copied from another answer I made:

          While Snaps became better in the last years, they still bring a lot of trouble. Just, for example, think of Valve when they officially recommended everyone to use the fricking Snap package because it’s broken all the time? Good luck doing that with Ubuntu, when they shove Snaps down everyones’ throat, without even notifying the user. While we more experienced users just change the package format, newcomers aren’t aware of that and blame a malfunctioning app to Linux, not the Snap.

          I just don’t see any reasons to recommend Ubuntu over something like Mint or even Debian. Both are pretty much the same (same command compatibility with apt, documentation also applies to them, etc.), but just better in any aspect.

        • EuroNutellaMan@lemmy.world
          2·
          7 months ago

          beginners don’t care but you, person recommending them Linux, should. We shouldn’t recommend distros whose maintainers do bad practices that can affect the noob negatively, especially if they don’t care because that means they will associate all those problems with Linux.

          Besides, the putting ads thing is a big no no. Why would I recommend someone coming from windows to use a distro that has one of the major flaws of windows when there’s better alternatives?

            • EuroNutellaMan@lemmy.world
              1·
              7 months ago

              if you know they don’t then just tell them to use Pop!_OS, Fedora, or any one of the other 5 billion distros out there that may suit their liking, tho preferably something that is easy to use and that they can easily find support for.

  • Gowozilla@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    161·
    9 months ago

    Do you like pain and wasting as much time as possible? Gentoo. Jk jk I’ve never used it, I’ve only seen memes about it.

    • Flaky@iusearchlinux.fyiEnglish
      4·
      9 months ago

      Gentoo isn’t so much painful but it takes a bloody long time. If anything, some of the packages are really painful. Qtwebengine is one such example.

    • leaky_shower_thought@feddit.nl
      2·
      9 months ago

      gentoo takes a long time. but currently they started shipping out binaries – and with a more recent architecture too (x86-64-p2 or - p4) which helps a lot as compared to building your own Libre office.

      they got good guides as well. I got to use one for troubleshooting even if I use a diff distro.

    • nyan@lemmy.cafeEnglish
      2·
      9 months ago

      Installing Gentoo requires you to 1. follow a long list of instructions (correctly, in order, without skipping) and 2. be willing to make some decisions about your system setup. I don’t consider that painful, but some people apparently do. It’s also useful to bring a book or some other secondary form of entertainment to occupy yourself with during the non-interactive parts of the install process. Once the initial install is done, you can minimize wasted time by starting updates right before leaving the computer, or just configure it to always leave one core free for your interactive needs.

      Gentoo has never been an appropriate distribution for new Linux users with no technical background, or people who want their system to “just work” without caring about how. It’s always been about choice, and its flexibility is both a strength and a weakness. Regardless, the OP did the correct thing by not including it in their guide.

  • qaz@lemmy.world
    132·
    9 months ago

    If you gave this to 14yo me choosing my first distro then I would have just given up. There are too many choices, just point noobs to something that works well and let them choose based on the DE.

    • Guenther_Amanita@feddit.deOPEnglish
      5·
      9 months ago

      As explained in another comment somewhere else here, Ubuntu is highly controversial, especially due to Snaps. I will paste my reasons here when I found them.

      I wanted to have a Debian-based distro here too, and TuxedoOS removes all the Ubuntu-shit and replaces it with some great OOTB additions (e.g. a good welcome wizard).

      Edit: Found it

      Yes. While Snaps became better in the last years, they still bring a lot of trouble. Just, for example, think of Valve when they officially recommended everyone to not use the fricking Snap package because it’s broken all the time? Good luck doing that with Ubuntu, when they shove Snaps down everyones’ throat, without even notifying the user. While we more experienced users just change the package format, newcomers aren’t aware of that and blame a malfunctioning app to Linux, not the Snap.

      I just don’t see any reasons to recommend Ubuntu over something like Mint or even Debian. Both are pretty much the same (same command compatibility with apt, documentation also applies to them, etc.), but just better in any aspect.

    • Guenther_Amanita@feddit.deOPEnglish
      10·
      9 months ago

      Sure, under two conditions.

      1. You say that you didn’t create the content yourself, and only provided the translation.
      2. You provide the link to the original post very visibly, preferably in a small statement in the beginning.

      Otherwise, here’s the raw file (Draw.io, FOSS, also available as Flatpak) and the Markdown text for you to paste. Link: https://notebin.de/?bacad84b46e92d92#3ZzsNgjBMCxudUGrJ6TV9hZTh5hFt1ctiAYgbuUNcjf2

      • Count Regal Inkwell@pawb.social
        1·
        9 months ago

        Hello again. It is done. As you requested, I have credited you (using your Lemmy @, if you’d rather I use something else, let me know) and linked your original post, as well as your profile and this community. (t’is all in the second paragraph of the text, as part of the introductory preamble)

        I also added some personal notes to the text, but they are mostly dumb stuff

        I once again thank you for allowing me to do this.

        • Guenther_Amanita@feddit.deOP
          1·
          9 months ago

          I sadly can’t open it. If I click on the link, it leads me to the main page, and if I search for it, then the post doesn’t open. Is that intended? I’m on mobile (Firefox) if that matters.

  • toastal@lemmy.ml
    91·
    9 months ago

    Calling GNOME a mobile UI perfectly sums up why I hate it on a desktop/laptop

    • Guenther_Amanita@feddit.deOP
      52·
      9 months ago

      Each to their own :)
      I’ve also read other comments telling me to drop KDE and Mint because Gnome is the “standard” DE for Linux, and that nobody else should use something different.

      This is why I included other DEs.
      While I personally love Gnome more than anything else and find myself working extremely efficient with it, others despite it and prefer other things like Plasma.

      Giving them a choice between 2 (3) great options felt right for me.

      • laverabe@lemmy.worldEnglish
        3·
        9 months ago

        Gnome is certainly the most polished. They just need to get over the ultra minimalism though, because it is completely non functional without installing a thousand extensions.

        Why they aren’t bringing back the dock is beyond insanity though. 3 million+ people agree, the dock needs to come back along with the application and places drop-down like it was in gnome 2.

        • Guenther_Amanita@feddit.deOPEnglish
          4·
          9 months ago

          Hard to say. Minimalism is just part of their philosophy, and also one of the reasons why it is so reliable.
          Adding a toggle for a “traditional workflow” would just diminish the unique workflow they’ve built up over the last years, and which so many people love so dearly.

          But adding a few extensions (GSConnect, quick close in overview, app tray, etc.) for basic functionality would be a big win.
          I just think having to rely on workflow altering extensions and forcing Gnome to be a certain way will make the user unhappy over time, and they’re better off just using KDE or Cinnamon imo.

  • Chewy@discuss.tchncs.de
    8·
    9 months ago

    I personally dislike recommending NixOS at all for new Linux users. Even though it’s packaging and file system differs from other Linux distros, it’s necessary to understand how general Linux works to understand why and how NixOS works.

    E.g. systemd services in NixOS are often times more complex as they include the full nix store path or execute a script which simply executes a command. This is because of how they are generated and obvious once you have experience how other distros systemd units look like.

    PS: I appreciate you helping people find a good distro. I’m merely nitpicking and complaining which doesn’t help anyone :D

    • Guenther_Amanita@feddit.deOP
      5·
      9 months ago

      That’s why I’ve put NixOS and Arch on the “I’m ready for an adventure and pain”-path, not the “You’ll have a comfy time with it”-one.

      I asked a few days prior what I should include, and a few mentioned said distros, because not everyone wants to start using Linux expecting an easy time.
      A few people said they’re in because they enjoy tinkering, learning, frustration and challenging themselfes, not because they are looking for a Windows alternative.

      Also, as side effect, newcomers easily see why they shouldn’t use Arch directly, in case some edgelord recommends that :D

      • Chewy@discuss.tchncs.de
        1·
        9 months ago

        Good reasoning. You’ve made it clear in your graph that Arch and NixOS aren’t recommended (for most newbies).

  • zerakith@lemmy.ml
    7·
    9 months ago

    Who knew recommending Distros could be so controversial 😛?

    Seriously though I think this is a great flowchart and you took on board the more reasonable suggestions from the intial post. This flowchart now quickly eliminates some of the distro choice anxiety. Worst case a newbie might end up on a distro like mint and then end up migrating to a different one.

    One comment I had is that I actually didn’t know what opinionated DE meant without googling despite being a long time Linux user (maybe thats just my ignorance) and I wonder if a newbie might be confused maybe there’s another way of saying it (flexible versus simple?).

    Anyway, I really think early me would have appreciated this when I first started even if that would been ultimately “use Ubuntu” back then.

    • blindsight@beehaw.org
      1·
      9 months ago

      I was looking for someone to mention “opinionated”. I’ve been using computers since the 386 days, mostly on Windows, granted, but with some Linux tinkering here and there, and I have no clue what that means.

      Still, maybe I should just jump into Bazzite regardless since gaming performance is a consideration for me.

  • Fryboyter@discuss.tchncs.de
    92·
    9 months ago

    I’m only referring to Arch now because I have no idea about NixOS.

    Arch and NixOS Those two are in the “pain” category. I would never recommend them to anyone starting with Linux, for example because they’re fed up with Windows

    In my opinion, you are making the mistake of equating all Windows users. But not every Windows user is the same.

    An acquaintance of mine, who works full-time as a Windows administrator, was able to install and configure Arch manually on his first attempt, for example. But yes, other Windows users would despair.

    But that’s exactly why you shouldn’t make blanket recommendations, but rather recommendations based on the wishes and knowledge of the person who wants to use Linux.

    high demanding

    Basically, you should be able to read and willing use a search engine. That’s all you really need.

    hard to set up and use

    If you use archinstall, which has long been an official part of the Arch iso file, you can install Arch within a short time. But I don’t think manual installation is very difficult either. Because if you follow the official instructions, you can simply execute many of the commands mentioned therein without having to change them beforehand.

    And what do you mean by hard to use?

    I’ve been using Arch for over 10 years, almost like any other distribution. Apart from only 3 things, 2 of which can be automated.

    requiring the user to be skilled and to know what he’s doing

    Not necessarily. The most important thing is that the user is willing to read, that he is willing to use a search engine and that he is willing to learn something new. And that is often the problem these days.

    And shall I tell you something? Even after several decades with Linux, I often have no idea what I’m doing. But I’m still trying to acquire new knowledge.

    don’t hold the users’ hand

    I agree with you here. Arch is, among other things, intended for users who want to solve their problems themselves. But that doesn’t mean that you can’t get help. However, it is expected that you first try to solve your problems yourself. And if that doesn’t work, you should ask smart questions. However, this guide does not only help with Arch. Basically, it is (even if it is now partly outdated) still one of the most important pieces of knowledge you can have.

    and don’t tolerate user error well.

    I have been using Linux for over 20 years and have therefore already used several distributions. Basically none of them tolerate errors. If I make a mistake when configuring Alacritty under Ubuntu, for example, basically the same thing happens as under Arch.

    Edit: Please don’t take this post the wrong way. My point is not to claim that Arch is like Ubuntu, for example. But these myths that have formed around Arch (e.g. that you can only learn Linux properly with Arch (which is complete nonsense)) are a bit annoying.

    • Guenther_Amanita@feddit.deOP
      101·
      9 months ago

      Of course, you’re right. I know I made some blanket statements, but I found it necessary to simplify everything a bit.

      I personally have the feeling you contradict yourself tho. You basically say “Arch is super easy”, but then list 100 reasons why it isn’t.

      As I said in the post, Arch is a fantastic distro, but nothing I would recommend for anyone.
      Most people don’t use their OS as a nerd hobby (sorry!), but as a means to get their software they need (browser, office, games, etc.) running.

      They just want something that works reliably and doesn’t get in their way.
      They don’t care if they use zfs or btrfs as filesystem or run the newest KDE framework.

      Needing to check the news page on daily basis, or risking to brick their system otherwise, is a big no-go for most.

      Of course, installing it isn’t the hardest part.

      But maintaining it reasonably is also important, which happens mostly passively on other systems. Turning on the PC and getting greeted by GRUB emergency mode is the worst case for anyone, and would result in installing Windows again for most.

      Also, it’s very minimalist. For users who already know what they need, that’s good.
      I don’t know if you know the greentext-meme with the Arch-guy who had to share his screen, but couldn’t because of his missing component, and then got laughed at and overshadowed by the girl with her Windows laptop.

      This “bloat” is what makes a comfortable computing experience for most other people, and needing to google “Arch no sound” and fixing something for two hours is just something not everyone is comfortable and willing with.

      That’s why I’ve made the big disclaimer and said it should only be chosen if you’re ready for a big learning experience and have the patience for that.