Linux which Distro?

[MacBH928]

Myth1: Linux distro are different

Truth: They are mostly the same. Don't even bother wondering which to install. The area where they are different is something built deep behind the scenes that only programmers will care about. As a user it won't matter. The truth about Distro's is every group of programmers take a version of Linux tweak it and customise it to their liking and calling it a distro. The point where it really matters is user friendliness, some distro like Mint are made to do the up lifting for you, others like Arch are made to make you set up every single thing on your own and give you a difficult time.

Myth2: Pick a distro based on the looks

Truth: All distros can be made to look like each other no matter what. If you see one Distro that looks very different than the other its because it was prepackaged and customized this way. You can make Mint look like Manjaro, or Ubuntu to look like OpenSUSE. Heck you can make them look like Windows or MacOS if you wish.

---

One thing you have to familirise yourself with is Desktop Environments. Unlike Windows or MacOS, Linux has the ability to change its interface. You can install multiple DEs on the same distro no problems at all and switch between them as much as you like. What you need to know is KDE is like Windows and GNOME has a very awkward way of functioning. XFCE+Mate look like old school Mac interface.

I would go with the easiest and most friendly one that is Mint. You can check Manjaro that looks cool and works fine too but I would go with Mint. There is also Zorin that looks like Windows, ElementaryOS that supposed to be mac like, and Deepin that is supposed to be the best looking one. PopOS is said to work best for games but who knows?

I would pick one with huge user base and great helpful community and that would again be Mint. You can lookup their community at reddit.com/r/linuxmint .

 

[Lee_Bo]

Another vote for Linux Mint. I've tried many different distros but seem to always come back to Mint for the same reason I stay with Apple:

It works.

 

[tornado99]

Mint certainly doesn't "just work" on my mid-2020 Lenovo laptop because it's using a kernel from 2019, so won't even boot. It's also a security risk because kernel 5.4 doesn't contain all the latest patches (we're on kernel 5.12 now). Also the Mint forums are full of people trying to manually install their wifi/sound card driver, because Mint lags so far behind in kernel updates.

Mint doesn't look like modern Windows either, it looks like XP with the classic menu. If you want something with everything in the same place as Windows 7+ then go with a KDE-based distro.

Mint doesn't have the largest userbase. Manjaro and Ubuntu do.

You can't make Mint look like any distro, because it only officially supports Cinnamon, Mate, and Xfce. No GNOME. No KDE.

Both Ubuntu and Manjaro will "just work", including auto-detection of all the latest hardware. I fail to see what is unfriendly or challenging about either of them.

 

[cobra521]

I recently switched from Debian to Ubuntu. Happier with Ubuntu - my $0.02

Tom

 

[bobcomer]

I find it curious that so many are recommending Linux Mint, which has purposefully frozen its interface to the 2000s era. As a Mac user I won't settle for a UI which isn't modern, aesthetically pleasing, and evolving for the future.

Check here to see what 2020s Linux looks like:

View attachment 1801861
View attachment 1801860

GNOME's Default Theme is Getting a Revamp

GNOME developers are working a "borderless" version of the Adwaita GTK theme for potential inclusion in GNOME 41. More details and pictures inside.

www.omgubuntu.co.uk

KDE Plasma 5.22 Released, This is What's New - OMG! Ubuntu

KDE Plasma 5.22 has been released, following a successful bout of beta testing last month. This uplift of the free, open source desktop environment

www.omgubuntu.co.uk

Well, I said I like Mint because I don't like the more modern UI's Linux has these days. I don't really need "modern" if it doesn't help me in a significant way.

I've only been testing Win11 right now, but there's a good example of when a more modern UI gets in the way -- connecting to an already set up VPN.

On Windows 10, 3 left mouse clicks, network icon, VPN tile, then Connect.

In Win11 it's 4 clicks. That doesn't sound like much, but it makes a difference, and it seems like all the Linux distributions place a clean look over cutting down on how quick tasks are to do and to find. Even Mint fails at it, but it's closer. (I don't use the cinnamon version) Give me a modern Linux with a V2 Gnome and I like it..

And it's all just a personal preference, and not easy convey to others..

 

[MacBH928]

Mint doesn't look like modern Windows either, it looks like XP with the classic menu. If you want something with everything in the same place as Windows 7+ then go with a KDE-based distro.

Mint doesn't have the largest userbase. Manjaro and Ubuntu do.

Not exactly. i didn't want to confuse OP. Mint is based on Ubuntu which is based on Debian. The debian userbase is huge, it might be 40% of the linux users if not more. To give you an idea the following popular distros are based on Debian or Ubuntu:
PopOS, Raspbian, Ubuntu(itself), Mint, Zorin, Elementary, Kubuntu, Xubuntu, MX Linux.

Meanwhile on the Arch side:
Arch and Manjaro.

Mint is the friendlier one this is a known thing in the Linux community. This does not mean you won't be able to run Ubuntu or Manjaro, it just means Mint is even more easier.

video showing how to install KDE on Linux Mint

I have no idea why Linux distro developers choose to be based on Debian, Ubuntu, Slackware, Fedora, or Arch. All I know is that the majority are basing on Debian.

 

[tornado99]

Mint is the friendlier one this is a known thing in the Linux community

Known by whom? There isn't some centralised consensus on such a topic.

I wouldn't call having to use terminal commands to install your wi-fi or graphics card driver very friendly. I can install and use Ubuntu on far more machines and it will "just work", simply because it uses a vastly more modern kernel - 5.11 vs 5.4 for Mint.

Your video on how to install KDE on Linux Mint doesn't look very friendly either. A whole bunch of terminal commands, whereas I could just grab a KDE-based distro ready to go.

My personal distro is Manjaro KDE. I rarely have to ever use the terminal unless I am doing something which most normal users wouldn't do. There are GUI options for all normal settings and tasks. It also has everything laid out very simliarly to Windows 7+. I really don't see in what way Mint could be friendlier than that.

 

[09872738]

Your video on how to install KDE on Linux Mint doesn't look very friendly either. A whole bunch of terminal commands, whereas I could just grab a KDE-based distro ready to go.

My personal distro is Manjaro KDE. I rarely have to ever use the terminal unless I am doing something which most normal users wouldn't do. There are GUI options for all normal settings and tasks. It also has everything laid out very simliarly to Windows 7+. I really don't see in what way Mint could be friendlier than that.

This ☝🏻. That said, I‘d choose ANY KDE based distro over anything else. Gtk is just not that good

 

[giv-as-a-ciggy-kent]

What with Apple now fetching out a new OS every year and my Mac Pro being long in the tooth I am thinking of installing
Linux on my 2009 Mac Pro, is it worth it and which distro should I use ? Also can this be installed externally so I can see
how it runs and what it can do ?

TempleOS

 

[MacBH928]

Known by whom? There isn't some centralised consensus on such a topic.

I wouldn't call having to use terminal commands to install your wi-fi or graphics card driver very friendly. I can install and use Ubuntu on far more machines and it will "just work", simply because it uses a vastly more modern kernel - 5.11 vs 5.4 for Mint.

Your video on how to install KDE on Linux Mint doesn't look very friendly either. A whole bunch of terminal commands, whereas I could just grab a KDE-based distro ready to go.

My personal distro is Manjaro KDE. I rarely have to ever use the terminal unless I am doing something which most normal users wouldn't do. There are GUI options for all normal settings and tasks. It also has everything laid out very simliarly to Windows 7+. I really don't see in what way Mint could be friendlier than that.

If you roam the internets you will see that there is a general consensus that Mint is the most user friendly one. That being said, it does not mean Manjaro is difficult or anything like that. It could be just as friendly.

I didn;t say installing KDE was easily, I said its possible so do not pick your distro based on looks.

Personally I think Manjaro looks a lot more sleek than Mint

 

[Mendota]

What with Apple now fetching out a new OS every year and my Mac Pro being long in the tooth I am thinking of installing
Linux on my 2009 Mac Pro, is it worth it and which distro should I use ? Also can this be installed externally so I can see
how it runs and what it can do ?

I too really like KDE Plasma and I duel boot it onto my older 2012 Macbook.

 

[DaveFromCampbelltown]

I have been playing with the latest Solus OS. It's really dodgy to install native mode if you want multi-boot, but it does run like the clappers under VMWare. It's not for the novice, the way Linux Mint or Elementary OS are, but if you are familiar with Linux, it might be for you.

 

[Mendota]

Well I just finished putting a new install of KDE onto an older but still powerful HP. It has a nice high res screen, so I enjoy it more than on the older Macbook. I found some great applications, including a new video editing app that I will be trying out this week.

 

[tornado99]

An interesting fact that I learnt recently is that out of the all the desktop environments, KDE is the only one to do true fractional scaling of all the parts that make up the desktop independently. The majority of these are scalar vector graphics (.svgs). So if you need to run at 125% or 150% it will be very crisp.

Both Gnome and OS X just do bitmap scaling of the framebuffer which results in bluriness.

For Macs you don't notice this as much because all the ecosystem is on 220 ppi 'retina' displays, but it's still less sharp than it could be.

 

[MacBH928]

An interesting fact that I learnt recently is that out of the all the desktop environments, KDE is the only one to do true fractional scaling of all the parts that make up the desktop independently. The majority of these are scalar vector graphics (.svgs). So if you need to run at 125% or 150% it will be very crisp.

Both Gnome and OS X just do bitmap scaling of the framebuffer which results in bluriness.

For Macs you don't notice this as much because all the ecosystem is on 220 ppi 'retina' displays, but it's still less sharp than it could be.

i kind of favour the softer look over the sharp edge look

 

[tornado99]

i kind of favour the softer look over the sharp edge look

you could also buy a VGA monitor off ebay if you want the ultimate softness.

 

[DaveFromCampbelltown]

you could also buy a VGA monitor off ebay if you want the ultimate softness.

I find it much cheaper to not clean my glasses. After a couple of days everything looks soft and fuzzy...

 

[MiniApple]

I've been dabbling with various Linux distros since a few days on a virtual machine in Windows.
They run smooth on older/lower hardware, most have a "try me" mode before installing it, which is really useful and neat.

My use cases: media player, web browser and very light office, photo editing and file management tasks.
It also has to be visually pleasing, easy to use without command line and have a good support/community.

EDIT: Ubuntu based ones will do.

Most importantly make sure whatever you wanna do, you know/can do with what is on offer software wise.

 

[tornado99]

A lot of these Linux distros with "OS" in the title are the Emperors New Clothes. They are not true OSs, which would amount to millions of lines of codes. They are just a few scripts which assemble together various existing components in different ways.

My rule of thumb for Linux is just stick to whatever has the largest number of users, and largest numbers of developers. Then just change the preferences to suit yourself.

The two big home-user focused bases are Ubuntu and Arch. Ubuntu have their own OS, and Manjaro is closest to a ready-assembled Arch OS. Then choose your preferred desktop environment e.g. Ubuntu + Gnome, or Manjaro + KDE.

 

[alex cochez]

My rule of thumb for Linux is just stick to whatever has the largest number of users, and largest numbers of developers. Then just change the preferences to suit yourself.

The two big home-user focused bases are Ubuntu and Arch. Ubuntu have their own OS, and Manjaro is closest to a ready-assembled Arch OS. Then choose your preferred desktop environment e.g. Ubuntu + Gnome, or Manjaro + KDE.

You make common sense.

It's not that I have that much experience, about 2 years ago I switched to linux, away from apple. First manjaro, then briefly fedora, to eventually settle with endeavorOS i3/sway (arch-based). It's been challenging and very pleasant in the same time.

When someone wants to see what linux is about, I'd say try out both ubuntu and an arch based distro on a live USB stick while installing some applications (both come with a different type of package manager and it only takes a couple of minutes to find out which approach fits you more). Then for the desktop environment, check out xfce, kde and gnome, play a bit with the themes. Finally, have a look at the community and online documentation. This all will help to make a choice.
For a laptop stick with wayland. for a desktop it doesn't matter much, xorg or wayland.

Use your first linux setup for 4-6 months at least. Don't hop around.
Don't avoid the command line. My experience is you get better and better while becoming a true owner of your machine.
When buying new parts, do a little research beforehand.

 

[wicknix]

My vote is for anything Debian based. I have Q4OS on my macpro. Everything worked out of the box.

 

[Varda]

For multiple years I've run the following: Ubuntu, Ubuntu Studio, and Linux Mint. I have also tried Fedora, Kodachi, and POP!_OS. There are a couple of more distro's I don't remember, but those were tried for a few hours at most and that was a long time ago.

However, I prefer Linux Mint with Cinnamon Desktop, and have used that as my main operating system for a good 8-9 years.

If someone wants to try a secure distro, then give Kodachi a try...

 

[MisterSavage]

I haven't explored other options in quite a while but I would recommend some flavor of Ubuntu. I've used Xubuntu and Kubuntu.

 

[MacBH928]

You make common sense.

It's not that I have that much experience, about 2 years ago I switched to linux, away from apple. First manjaro, then briefly fedora, to eventually settle with endeavorOS i3/sway (arch-based). It's been challenging and very pleasant in the same time.

When someone wants to see what linux is about, I'd say try out both ubuntu and an arch based distro on a live USB stick while installing some applications (both come with a different type of package manager and it only takes a couple of minutes to find out which approach fits you more). Then for the desktop environment, check out xfce, kde and gnome, play a bit with the themes. Finally, have a look at the community and online documentation. This all will help to make a choice.
For a laptop stick with wayland. for a desktop it doesn't matter much, xorg or wayland.

Use your first linux setup for 4-6 months at least. Don't hop around.
Don't avoid the command line. My experience is you get better and better while becoming a true owner of your machine.
When buying new parts, do a little research beforehand.

After CSAM I am thinking of abandoning Apple altogether. I am interested in your experience. Most that worries me is Apps, most Linux apps are half baked open source projects.

The other thing that worries me is the "It just works" which has greatly benefitied me on MacOS. Everything works no need to extra fiddle. Whenever I use Windows I find myself right back in the Control Panel trying to figure how something works or why it stopped working.

Also, does Linux have auto-save? With MacOS I just open a text file , type, quit...it auto saved it no worries. Even on a crash it auto save my opened tabs.

My vote is for anything Debian based. I have Q4OS on my macpro. Everything worked out of the box.

View attachment 1818858

may I ask why you use this very obscure Q4QS distro?

 

[wicknix]

Well, it's still debian under the hood which is probably the best base you could ask for. However q4os has created and/or added some nice extra features. It also kind of resembles win32 in some aspects which makes it easy to use. 25 years ago I was a fan of LFS and slackware, but now I'm a bit lazy and just want things to be configured already. I also chose it because it worked with no issues. No installer issues, no x11/graphical issues, no Wi-Fi issues, no Bluetooth issues, etc. When I tried Ubuntu 20.04 the live dvd was fine. Once I installed it, all I got was a black screen. Same happened for various other distros. So in a nutshell.... q4os just worked on my machine while others failed.

Cheers