We're not in Ubuntu Anymore: The Linux Distros You've (Probably) Never Heard About Before

dangh

Posts: 329   +465
Solus is really nice, same as elementary. Deepin is absolitely gorgeous. Still waiting for new steam os, though. Nearly made transition when I had to switch w7 to w10, maybe I will succeed with w10 to w11.
 

Wrinkle

Posts: 91   +68
I use Mint on one of my daily drivers and I like it a lot because of its speed and friendly gui. I also run Steam on this system and it's flawless.

For servers I use debian minimal or alpine, the latter for docker hosts. It's installation size is about 150MB. Ironically they are all hosted on Windows 10 Pro running Hyper-V.
 

Dimitriid

Posts: 1,340   +2,628
Too many distros. This is the greatest problem with Linux. I pass.

There's indeed too many distros, but you don't really need to pass: If anyone tells me there's too many distros I usually tell them to stick to a flavor of Ubuntu: The regular one works well enough, Kubuntu if you want something looking closer to windows or Linux Mint if you also want something closer to Windows but that isn't as wide open in choices as KDE/Kubuntu. If your machine is a bit weaker then Xubuntu or Lubuntu for the lightweight versions that should just run on just about anything.

That's it really it's just down to 3 or 4 choices, the rest you'd only want if you have been using Linux for a while and you know what you want to get out of those distros and even then whenever possible I'd stick with the more established and well supported ones (I.e. Stick to Manjaro if you want to experience rolling release, Arch is too complicated and smaller Arch/Manjaro flavors are too niche you might as well just get Manjaro and add whatever else you want it so it looks and feels like those other smaller distros)
 

Freddie159

Posts: 90   +59
I agree about the various flavors of Ubuntu, thou
There's indeed too many distros, but you don't really need to pass: If anyone tells me there's too many distros I usually tell them to stick to a flavor of Ubuntu: The regular one works well enough, Kubuntu if you want something looking closer to windows or Linux Mint if you also want something closer to Windows but that isn't as wide open in choices as KDE/Kubuntu. If your machine is a bit weaker then Xubuntu or Lubuntu for the lightweight versions that should just run on just about anything.

That's it really it's just down to 3 or 4 choices, the rest you'd only want if you have been using Linux for a while and you know what you want to get out of those distros and even then whenever possible I'd stick with the more established and well supported ones (I.e. Stick to Manjaro if you want to experience rolling release, Arch is too complicated and smaller Arch/Manjaro flavors are too niche you might as well just get Manjaro and add whatever else you want it so it looks and feels like those other smaller distros)

I agree about sticking with the different flavors of Ubuntu even though I use Linux Mint, the problem with non Ubuntu versions is the lack of the abundance of answers to any problems people might have, there are just more people using some version of Ubuntu than most of the other versions of Linux.

In the end it's about picking one you like, I've tried dozens, and then sticking with it so you get better on making it do what you want it to do. No no version of Linux is the 'exact same' as Windows but just like when we all started using Windows it took time to become familiar with how it works, give your choice a week or so and then if you don't like how something works try another version. Most Linux distros will load onto a cheap 120gb SSD making it fast and easy to change your mind if you want to try another version.
 

Yenega

Posts: 302   +202
There's indeed too many distros, but you don't really need to pass: If anyone tells me there's too many distros I usually tell them to stick to a flavor of Ubuntu: The regular one works well enough, Kubuntu if you want something looking closer to windows or Linux Mint if you also want something closer to Windows but that isn't as wide open in choices as KDE/Kubuntu. If your machine is a bit weaker then Xubuntu or Lubuntu for the lightweight versions that should just run on just about anything.

That's it really it's just down to 3 or 4 choices, the rest you'd only want if you have been using Linux for a while and you know what you want to get out of those distros and even then whenever possible I'd stick with the more established and well supported ones (I.e. Stick to Manjaro if you want to experience rolling release, Arch is too complicated and smaller Arch/Manjaro flavors are too niche you might as well just get Manjaro and add whatever else you want it so it looks and feels like those other smaller distros)

There's tons of debian derivatives like Ubuntu - MX Linux also highly popular. It's pointless to use Linux if you are not technical. Linux is only free if your time has no value. I use it for server (debian) not for desktop thats for sure. Missing tons of native app support because of >1% marketshare.

Good for server, pointless for desktop, for most people that is, especially gamers.
 

Dimitriid

Posts: 1,340   +2,628
There's tons of debian derivatives like Ubuntu - MX Linux also highly popular. It's pointless to use Linux if you are not technical. Linux is only free if your time has no value. I use it for server (debian) not for desktop thats for sure. Missing tons of native app support because of >1% marketshare.

Good for server, pointless for desktop, for most people that is, especially gamers.

I agree, but there's some caveats here I'd like to throw out, hear me out: Linux and any of the distros are overall very technical if and only if you are only looking at the perspective of a current, inexperienced-to-experienced windows user.

If you're not familiar at all with computers and you don't have to deal with the traps Microsoft laid out to keep users in Windows like monopolizing and taking over the boot process, then someone fully unfamiliar with computers would probably have less and not more issues with something like Ubuntu: Installer if you have a blank ssd or hard drive is fairly fool proof, far shorter than Windows.

After you're in you press a button, type like you want like "Images" or "Internet" or "email" or "files"and it just comes up with the thing you're looking for. It used to be that it would probably fail when running some of your favorite games and Windows apps but nowdays, if you want excel you can just use the browser version (If you need more, you know you need more and you're a Windows user from before) and if you want games you should just click "Lutris" (Which honestly desperately needs a better name, but I digress) search your game, click install and it mostly works.

If you have used Windows before, either as a hobby or for your job and you know your way around enough things, you know enough that you need to un-learn. This is almost everybody: it's you, me, likely anyone reading a tech site like this one knows enough Windows to install and uninstall stuff, kill tasks on the task manager, change important settings, even check and reinstall drivers on device manager, troubleshoot nerworking stuff on those menus still from like the XP era that Windows never updates to switch to manual DNS, static IP, etc.

For those people then absolutely, everything you said is true: Moving to Linux will eat up a lot of your time. But it's not that Linux is inherently complicated: Windows is often far more complicated. We just had like 10 to 20 years of constantly using Windows so you've learned to deal with it by now and if any OS does anything different, it will seem super complicated to you.

It's not, it's just a non-windows way to do things. But that's enough to have this reputation of being an inscrutable nerd OS.

Also last point: the Linux community overall doesn't helps with this "nerd OS" image with their abrasive attitude and outright gate keeping. Worst part of Linux to me it's the user base but hey, to me that's true of any OS.
 

Geralt

Posts: 824   +1,247
There's tons of debian derivatives like Ubuntu - MX Linux also highly popular. It's pointless to use Linux if you are not technical. Linux is only free if your time has no value. I use it for server (debian) not for desktop thats for sure. Missing tons of native app support because of >1% marketshare.

Good for server, pointless for desktop, for most people that is, especially gamers.
I pass for desktop. On my server I use Centos, obviously.
 

Beerfloat

Posts: 326   +580
Another Mint user here. I like it because almost anything that applies to Ubuntu also works on Mint, and it has a pleasant, easy to navigate GUI (I like Cinnamon, but MATE works just as well).

The technical reason I prefer it over Ubuntu itself is that Mint still provides .deb packages for everything. While it can run snaps, it doesn't actively try to migrate you over. Not using snaps helps it feel a bit faster and more memory efficient. But that's something most people shouldn't worry about. Ubuntu is cool too.

And so are many other distributions. I've used and continue to use several of them, and they all have their reasons for existing, and if you find something else you like (because of feel, technical reason, philosophy, whatever), great!
 

Dimitriid

Posts: 1,340   +2,628
I pass for desktop. On my server I use Centos, obviously.

That's very fair. In fact, one of the modern trends I'm really liking is developers getting enthusiastic about home labs: you've got a lot of new active Linux users doing all kinds of stuff like having NAS and Virtualization servers and running containers and it's mostly all Linux deployments, yet most of them are perfectly comfortable remaining on Windows (Or even macos) for their day-to-day use and use Linux as a personal server and development platform and explicitly *not* a desktop os and I think that's a fantastic use of it.
 

DjoCoeur

Posts: 44   +28
I prefer MX Linux for the multimedia PC connected to my TV.

For my main PC I have to Use Windows only because of the Adobe programs and some games like GTA V and Red Dead Redemption 2
 

yRaz

Posts: 3,911   +4,194
I hate it when I hear people say there are too many versions of Linux. You have like 5 main versions and then a bunch of small ones based off those that hardly anyone uses and is maintained by a group of 20 or fewer people who don't even do it full time.

Either use Mint or make your own kernel.
 

Geralt

Posts: 824   +1,247
I hate it when I hear people say there are too many versions of Linux. You have like 5 main versions and then a bunch of small ones based off those that hardly anyone uses and is maintained by a group of 20 or fewer people who don't even do it full time.

Either use Mint or make your own kernel.
"Don't try to take on too much" reads the old saying. With "ONE" distro would be more than enough. I cannot imagine having to lead with many versions of Windows 11, for example. Just absurd, except for something extremely specific which is necessary for 0.1% of the users. Too much confusion for non-Linux users (like me) wanting to jump to Linux some day.
 
Too many distros. This is the greatest problem with Linux. I pass.
There are only three free Linux distros: Ubuntu/Debian, Fedora, and Open SUSE. Everything else is either an enterprise product, a special purpose item, or a personal experimentation/improvisation. Everyone is free to experiment with Linux; everyone has the right to think of themselves they are Linux producers/distributors. You don't have to follow them; you don't have to share their views.
 

meric

Posts: 328   +341
I'd recommend Zorin 16 for the people new to Linux ecosystem. I tried many distros and in my experience Zorin was the most user friendly one with a simple but beautiful interface. You're going to like it.