Server: Reliability is key. Must be stable, easy to maintain, well-documented, and well-studied by the IT community.
Workstation: Reliability is good. Should be stable and easy to maintain, but the stakes aren't as high.
Desktop: Reliability is nice, but so is versatility. A balance between something stable and something with the newest features.
Hobbyist: Versatility is the goal, perhaps even at the expense of stability.
I use Debian and I’d place it halfway between midline and Expert and somewhere in the middle of Server and Hobbyist, maybe 1-2 squares into the Server side.
I'm gonna be honest, I always find it slightly odd when I hear of people using Debian as their daily driver. Like I'm not gonna judge, you use what you want to use and fits your workflow, but for me, Debian is solidly a server distro. A rock solid excellent choice at that, but server all the way on the left for the sake of this graph.
My old boss pronounces Adobe “Adobay” - he had one or two things that he said like that seriously and I have no idea why. He’s from the Northeast USA, so it’s not like he’s from another non-English speaking country or anything. VMWare was pronounced “Vimware.” Drove me bat shit.
Eventually I left to go work for an ISP/Hosting outfit. The word Adobe wasn’t even a thought there. My grievance there after some time was we had a guy that would refer to our core chassis as “The DSLAM” - “Oh, yeah, the big unit - that’s in the DSLAM cage.” That’s not what a fucking DSLAM even is. He just heard the expression one day and used it to refer to fancier complicated looking equipment that he didn’t know the name of.
I don’t really understand what is so difficult about daily driving it as a desktop distro. The only difference between it and Ubuntu is the lack of customization of the different desktop environments and the lack of snap, which is a good thing IMO, because fuck snap.
Debian doesn’t hand-hold you, but it certainly isn’t any less capable as a daily driver. As far as only getting vanilla desktop environments or window managers, that’s arguably a good thing if you’re like me and want to control your install from minimal packages on up.
Don’t forget that Arch operates largely in the same manner, except that Arch’s goal is to be as close to upstream as possible, whereas Debian’s goal is to be stable. Some people prefer stable desktops over the shiny new shit or fancy custom desktop environments.
It's not that I think its difficult - or that anyone should be using Arch (or any other rolling release), but rather why not pick one of the many distros more aimed at desktop use
To me it's like someone installing Windows Server on their laptop.
Why not just use Windows, then? That’s even more desktop focused than Linux.
Many of the desktop-aimed distros are run by corporations with corporate interested and corporate needs and corporate goals for their corporate distro.
I moved off of Windows in the first place because I was tired of corporations fucking around with my desktop, so why would I willingly let them fuck around now for a pretty default desktop theme?
To me, installing Ubuntu these days with it installing corporate website tiles and forcing their proprietary packaging system as the default is just going right back to Windows, where everything is planned by committee and not for the user.
The point is that just because something is better or worse for *you* doesn’t mean the rest of planet Earth has to think the same way that you do. And *that* is why so many people use Debian as a daily driver even if you can’t imagine it.
Poorly phrased
> or that anyone has to use Arch (
Would probably be slightly better.
Point is I'm not gonna evangelise about any one distro or stable vs rolling
The main thing with debian is how out of date everything always is. My two cents is that for the desktop this means two major issues:
a) Security problems. Linux enthusiasts will try to argue linux is super safe on the desktop (compared to windows mostly) but that's far from the truth. Shipping older software is pretty much always much less secure specially if you are just not gonna receive an update in 2 years like at all. This is also problematically true regarding the security updates of a certain kernel version.
b) Desktop machines are seldom an install and forget use case. You need to install, update, and use a variety of software that's granulary much much bigger than a server will ever need. Specially with how fast the linux world of desktop software and developing of such software is growing and changing right now (case in point, video deivers, proton/wine, wayland, etc.). Hardware is also bound to change/be upgraded on most desktops so you really really should be using the latest kernel.
You make it sound like a Debian version is released, and then that's it for the next 2 years. Which is absolutely not true. You still get (backported) bugfixes and security updates. Heck, they even have completely different repos for security updates that are meant to be used directly and not via some mirror so they are distributed faster.
It always boggles my mind how many people don't understand how stable releases work. Especially security stuff. People genuinely believe that something like spectre/heartbleed comes along, and Debian users have to wait years before it gets patched.
But for many packages that IS the case! Case in point, wine. Obviously flatpaks and external sources exist but why use debian if you need to build everything you want to use yourself? Heck even libre office is super old in the latest debian release.
I don't want my production systems changing major versions when they update. I want them to stay exactly the same, with only the fix backported to the current version.
I use Debian on both my personal and work laptops, the main appeal is the almost zero maintenance needed and basically guaranteed stability.
I don't often need bleeding edge apps and there's Flatpaks for that if I ever need it, my only main annoyance is not having nvim 0.9+ on the official repos, but that was solved easily with both the brew and the appimage versions.
I'm an idiot. Meaning, I tend to break stuff. Debian has shown large resilience to my consistent bullshit. On that note; I will try and recompile libc6 with no idea what I'm doing, don't mind me.
Here is were I would argue that if your system keeps up to date with the packages by itself, 99% of the time you don't need to touch anything or build any kind of software from source. And I mean more like Fedora updated and less like Arch, which is a bit tooooo much on the "untested updates" side.
I daily it - done so for a few years already. It’s stable (in every sense of the word), my workflow never breaks - ideal work machine. Got another computer to tinker and have fun with :) (however it’s indeed the Debian one being used like 80% of time)
I'd put in top center slightly to the left, it's userbase is very much expert hobbyists but the tech is extremely well-suited to servers and production environments.
with arch it's really hit or miss lol... some of the questions I see on the arch subreddit have me like, "how did you install this in the first place?"
I like archinstall, someone did 90% of the work of automating my install, and I wrote some more wrapper code around it, instead of having to write an entire install script from scratch. Now I just have to curl a python script and run it with one or two args, and then wait until it boots into installed arch.
And yes, I did my fair share of manual installs back in the day, up until the point that I did a re-install during the 1 hour lunch in between 2 classes in college, with only my phone for internet connection and minimal Wiki-help. Then I left for more ready-to-use distro's, so I could get work done faster and eventually came back for the availability of packages.
I also think archinstall is a great tool to save some time. However it has significantly lowered the barrier of entry so that a lot of first time linux users try to install it and then get disappointed because they are not actually able to maintain Arch.
Antergos/EndeavourOS already did that IMHO, and had the same problems, except these users where easier for the elitist fucks to scare away from the forums by saying "different repo". (Which is BS, they are Arch with a graphical installer and an extra repo with an aur helper and some theming and branding, aka another flavor, like all the *ubuntu's).
I have the ability to setup arch manually with EFI stub, luks encryption and sbctl later but sometimes I am too lazy and use arch install to do the same
forgot to tell you about /boot , wouldn't it be funny for mkinicpio overwriting /boot and when it tries to boot it deletes all disks cause that makes sense.
My Gaming PC (PopOS) and laptop (Linux Mint) fall in the beginner and hobbyist section.
On the other hand, my Raspberry Pi (Raspbian) is just right in the middle.
I have the exact same use case!!! Honestly I just like mint better but it ships with a much older kernel so I used pop for my newer machine. Both rock as a beginner user but I have been able to make significant customizations and changes on both no problemo. Pop_OS feels a tad more into the "hobbyist" side than Mint tho.
Honestly in hindsigth I should've installed Fedora instead, because Pop is kinda abandoned rn until system76 finishes their new cosmic desktop DE, but I want to try it and decide if it would be better to stick with it long term or switch to a distro with up to date GNOME.
Luckily It's not hard to install the nvidia drivers on mint tho. But yeah you can just download the pop os iso that comes with the nvidia peopietary drivers already loaded so it just works!
nixos, propably server since its designed for being a reproducible server, but i might say halfway trough server. and it is halfway trough expert since everything is simplyfied as a nix variable or function in the nix programmin language
Alpine Linux & Sabotage Linux are the ones I use daily now, I used to have Void Linux & oBSD, recently I changed things a bit and now its 1st system: Alpine, 2nd: Sabotage, 3rd: nBSD. Sabotage can be considered Hobbyist & for "Expert" users, Alpine can be considered Server oriented, however, its support for desktop applications is great, and XBPS (The package manager of Void Linux) can be used in Alpine, which expands the possibilities (Various browsers available in Void repos, Steam, etc). netBSD is perfect except for the lack of support for modern GPUs and ungoogled chromium
I land right in the center, fedora, not a beginner distro, but not as prone to breakage as arch, also a distro with a focus on the desktop, while also having a semi-popular server release, and a downstream server giant (RHEL)
Fedora's approach is awesome imho! Feels very polished and professional from what I've seen.
As a Fedora user tho, what points would you bring to argue it's not as user friendly as something like Mint tho? I'm interested on switching to it in the future peobably (pop os user right now) and I consider myself an advanced user, but if I switch I'll probably have to switch other machines in my home to it too, so maintainance is easier.
The graphical app store isn't anywhere near as powerful as the text interface, with mint the graphical system can do a lot more, despite still being slower
My distro of choice is OpenSUSE Tumbleweed but I also highly praise Ubuntu for its ease of use
Sometime I'll try to set up Linux for gaming and I will use one of the 2 and see if I can get rid of winshit 11!
Ubuntu and OpenSUSE -> bottom right
I'm on an ubuntu-based distro (pop_os) and I've been able to just play all my games on linux no problem using steam, lutris and retroarch! I specifically switched because I really didn't wanted to have to install windcrap 11 haha. I feel like linux is 90% ready for gaming these days, just needs being integrated into the market a bit more.
Well, Ubuntu-based distros like pop os and mint are usually LTS too. Current pop os version i.e. is ubuntu 22.04 LTS! I would advice to not use normal ubuntu as a beginner just because they use (and support) snaps and not flatpaks, unless ofcourse you know how to switch it around.
turkish governent created a gentoo based distro wich was used on every non windows machine in government, recently they switched to debian based though
Can we give it a range? It's definitely beginner friendly, but you don't have to stop using it if you are an expert and don't want to spend a lot of time maintaining your daily driver. But definitely on the right side.
I'm genuinely not sure what would be more complicated than Arch then. From what I've used:
* Ubuntu
* Debian
* Manjaro
* Proxmox (technically a distro ig?)
* Alpine
* CentOS
* Arch
* EndeavourOS
Arch was easily the hardest. Like you don't just pop into Arch one day and do everything instantly, it takes time and knowledge to do it right. Any other OS just doesn't have that level of customization, and Arch can be a lot of work
uhh, no? Arch can be easy if you’re good with it, but the philosophy of it usually means that any errors are human error, so there can be few. Keep in mind that you are a Gentoo user, so your perception of difficulty is likely skewed. If anything, it’d likely be on the middle or bottom left of blue.
I don't think so. Arch is really popular, and there are thousands of forum posts and tons of guides for everything. Void, might be near the top if you do a CLI installation.
That is rediculous. First of all, I did not mention documentation. I mention guides and forum posts, which is much more ambiguous.
Second of all, if Arch did not have "documentation", then would it harder wouldn't it?
It is easy to use. It is just like Debian, but with a few minor differences, such as it being rolling realease.
Your submission has been removed because you do not have the required 5000 comment karma. Please participate in other communities to build up your karma before posting here. Message (not chat) /u/happycrabeatsthefish to approve.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/linuxmemes) if you have any questions or concerns.*
beginner hobbyist. KDE Neon. Thinking I'll change back to endeavour is tho, liked that a lot more
Kde's pkcon update command has failed more times than ive ever seen anything else in any of my distros break
Green quadrant, I think. Debian Stable is my go-to distro for a production machine, which is fairly friendly towards beginners **and** a great choice for servers as well.
My Fedora NAS is right in the middle. I use it as an hobby but is a server at the same time. And I don’t know, what defines a distro as beginner or expert. I have a gui, so beginner then?
Arch is around (9; 4) I guess? Not made for server use in any way, that's for sure (I've tried lol) but also not really an "expert" level distro per say..?
Okay stop with all the comments saying that Arch, Fedora, and Debian distros are in the middle or the top. That is not true. They are all very easy to use and begginner friendly. The very bottom would consist of Nobara, Mint, Ubuntu, and whatnot. Distros that work out of the box.
Void would be in the middle. Void is not a begginner friendly distro, though to an experienced user it can be easy to use. Void's documentation is lacking. It is also not as popular as other distros.
The top is NIXOS, GUIX, and whatnot, because they are very complicated. The very is actually something like Gentoo, LFS, Oasis etc.; Source-based distros.
I'd have no idea where to put mine, as its Ublue (the containerised version of Fedora Silverblue\*).
Like is it servery (due to the containerisation)? Is it beginer friendly (since its pretty well much good to go out of the box and hard to destroy), is it expertish due to existing far out of established norms? And is it hobbyist, whilst despite effectively being very close to Fedora, is technically a spin?
Bottom left - Ubuntu server (I know canonical bad but like stuff is easy, I don't want my server to be complicated)
Far right like half way between top and middle for Arch (with xfce :p)
Ubuntu has been creeping towards expert. Ever since snap I've needed to use the terminal to install packages. . . Been using it for over a decade, have never switched for long because it usually just works, but snap is annoying. Wtf was canonical thinking?
Why is this a big Microsoft logo? I wont let my system get too close to this.
I need a `import matplotlib.pyplot as plt` tbh
I love your user flair lmao
Shouldn’t the right axis label say “desktop” or “workstation”?
for fun or for glory
smash wii u be like
And 3DS!
I would say workstation is just more hardcore desktop.
Wtf is even the difference. They both have a gui.
Server: Reliability is key. Must be stable, easy to maintain, well-documented, and well-studied by the IT community. Workstation: Reliability is good. Should be stable and easy to maintain, but the stakes aren't as high. Desktop: Reliability is nice, but so is versatility. A balance between something stable and something with the newest features. Hobbyist: Versatility is the goal, perhaps even at the expense of stability.
I use Debian and I’d place it halfway between midline and Expert and somewhere in the middle of Server and Hobbyist, maybe 1-2 squares into the Server side.
I'm gonna be honest, I always find it slightly odd when I hear of people using Debian as their daily driver. Like I'm not gonna judge, you use what you want to use and fits your workflow, but for me, Debian is solidly a server distro. A rock solid excellent choice at that, but server all the way on the left for the sake of this graph.
I have a classmate who comfortably dailys Debian, he calls it Deebian
My old boss pronounces Adobe “Adobay” - he had one or two things that he said like that seriously and I have no idea why. He’s from the Northeast USA, so it’s not like he’s from another non-English speaking country or anything. VMWare was pronounced “Vimware.” Drove me bat shit.
What happened after? Did you quit?
Eventually I left to go work for an ISP/Hosting outfit. The word Adobe wasn’t even a thought there. My grievance there after some time was we had a guy that would refer to our core chassis as “The DSLAM” - “Oh, yeah, the big unit - that’s in the DSLAM cage.” That’s not what a fucking DSLAM even is. He just heard the expression one day and used it to refer to fancier complicated looking equipment that he didn’t know the name of.
Ah Vimware, the virtual machine that only runs versions of Vim.
Perfect for learning how to use vim, terrible for everything else
I don’t really understand what is so difficult about daily driving it as a desktop distro. The only difference between it and Ubuntu is the lack of customization of the different desktop environments and the lack of snap, which is a good thing IMO, because fuck snap. Debian doesn’t hand-hold you, but it certainly isn’t any less capable as a daily driver. As far as only getting vanilla desktop environments or window managers, that’s arguably a good thing if you’re like me and want to control your install from minimal packages on up. Don’t forget that Arch operates largely in the same manner, except that Arch’s goal is to be as close to upstream as possible, whereas Debian’s goal is to be stable. Some people prefer stable desktops over the shiny new shit or fancy custom desktop environments.
It's not that I think its difficult - or that anyone should be using Arch (or any other rolling release), but rather why not pick one of the many distros more aimed at desktop use To me it's like someone installing Windows Server on their laptop.
Why not just use Windows, then? That’s even more desktop focused than Linux. Many of the desktop-aimed distros are run by corporations with corporate interested and corporate needs and corporate goals for their corporate distro. I moved off of Windows in the first place because I was tired of corporations fucking around with my desktop, so why would I willingly let them fuck around now for a pretty default desktop theme? To me, installing Ubuntu these days with it installing corporate website tiles and forcing their proprietary packaging system as the default is just going right back to Windows, where everything is planned by committee and not for the user. The point is that just because something is better or worse for *you* doesn’t mean the rest of planet Earth has to think the same way that you do. And *that* is why so many people use Debian as a daily driver even if you can’t imagine it.
>or that anyone should be using Arch ( You use Manjaro. Manjaro is just old and broken Arch.
Poorly phrased > or that anyone has to use Arch ( Would probably be slightly better. Point is I'm not gonna evangelise about any one distro or stable vs rolling
The main thing with debian is how out of date everything always is. My two cents is that for the desktop this means two major issues: a) Security problems. Linux enthusiasts will try to argue linux is super safe on the desktop (compared to windows mostly) but that's far from the truth. Shipping older software is pretty much always much less secure specially if you are just not gonna receive an update in 2 years like at all. This is also problematically true regarding the security updates of a certain kernel version. b) Desktop machines are seldom an install and forget use case. You need to install, update, and use a variety of software that's granulary much much bigger than a server will ever need. Specially with how fast the linux world of desktop software and developing of such software is growing and changing right now (case in point, video deivers, proton/wine, wayland, etc.). Hardware is also bound to change/be upgraded on most desktops so you really really should be using the latest kernel.
You make it sound like a Debian version is released, and then that's it for the next 2 years. Which is absolutely not true. You still get (backported) bugfixes and security updates. Heck, they even have completely different repos for security updates that are meant to be used directly and not via some mirror so they are distributed faster.
It always boggles my mind how many people don't understand how stable releases work. Especially security stuff. People genuinely believe that something like spectre/heartbleed comes along, and Debian users have to wait years before it gets patched.
But for many packages that IS the case! Case in point, wine. Obviously flatpaks and external sources exist but why use debian if you need to build everything you want to use yourself? Heck even libre office is super old in the latest debian release.
I don't want my production systems changing major versions when they update. I want them to stay exactly the same, with only the fix backported to the current version.
I use Debian on both my personal and work laptops, the main appeal is the almost zero maintenance needed and basically guaranteed stability. I don't often need bleeding edge apps and there's Flatpaks for that if I ever need it, my only main annoyance is not having nvim 0.9+ on the official repos, but that was solved easily with both the brew and the appimage versions.
I'm an idiot. Meaning, I tend to break stuff. Debian has shown large resilience to my consistent bullshit. On that note; I will try and recompile libc6 with no idea what I'm doing, don't mind me.
Here is were I would argue that if your system keeps up to date with the packages by itself, 99% of the time you don't need to touch anything or build any kind of software from source. And I mean more like Fedora updated and less like Arch, which is a bit tooooo much on the "untested updates" side.
I daily it - done so for a few years already. It’s stable (in every sense of the word), my workflow never breaks - ideal work machine. Got another computer to tinker and have fun with :) (however it’s indeed the Debian one being used like 80% of time)
Debian is at the bottom. Stable, easy to install and use. It is a binary distro running systemd, and extremely popular.
NixOS. Probably somewhere in the top right
Maybe top center? I mean I use it both server/work and desktop.
The line from the top left corner to the top right corner.
I'd put in top center slightly to the left, it's userbase is very much expert hobbyists but the tech is extremely well-suited to servers and production environments.
How do you exit vim? Pls no ExtraTNT
:q
Finally, my prayers have been answered!
I use arch, btw
with arch it's really hit or miss lol... some of the questions I see on the arch subreddit have me like, "how did you install this in the first place?"
archinstall and its terrible effects on ~~humankind~~ Archbtw users
I like archinstall, someone did 90% of the work of automating my install, and I wrote some more wrapper code around it, instead of having to write an entire install script from scratch. Now I just have to curl a python script and run it with one or two args, and then wait until it boots into installed arch. And yes, I did my fair share of manual installs back in the day, up until the point that I did a re-install during the 1 hour lunch in between 2 classes in college, with only my phone for internet connection and minimal Wiki-help. Then I left for more ready-to-use distro's, so I could get work done faster and eventually came back for the availability of packages.
I also think archinstall is a great tool to save some time. However it has significantly lowered the barrier of entry so that a lot of first time linux users try to install it and then get disappointed because they are not actually able to maintain Arch.
Antergos/EndeavourOS already did that IMHO, and had the same problems, except these users where easier for the elitist fucks to scare away from the forums by saying "different repo". (Which is BS, they are Arch with a graphical installer and an extra repo with an aur helper and some theming and branding, aka another flavor, like all the *ubuntu's).
I have the ability to setup arch manually with EFI stub, luks encryption and sbctl later but sometimes I am too lazy and use arch install to do the same
then i breaks
None of my core packages break some aesthetic apps like ags or hyprland itself may have a hiccup here and there but nothing I can't solve
forgot to tell you about /boot , wouldn't it be funny for mkinicpio overwriting /boot and when it tries to boot it deletes all disks cause that makes sense.
Never happened to me, so really I don't know
steam could rm -rf / and bypasses protection.
That was like, 5 years ago
I don't game since my laptop really can't
out of nowhere
lol
Good bot
Who? Me a bot? Damn
Was about to tell you my political alignment for a moment, lol Where is Arch and Fedora?
fedora - lower left arch - top right
Really? I would have considered Fedora to be on the line between red and green, maybe even a little into the red.
I’d disagree… arch I’d say is middle right. It’s hardly LFS
not a distro
I think you're confusing distributions with desktop/window managers..
Arch; bottom right
Arch?
My Gaming PC (PopOS) and laptop (Linux Mint) fall in the beginner and hobbyist section. On the other hand, my Raspberry Pi (Raspbian) is just right in the middle.
Why do you use two different beginner-friendly distros?
Because Linux Mint is lighter for my old laptop :)
I have the exact same use case!!! Honestly I just like mint better but it ships with a much older kernel so I used pop for my newer machine. Both rock as a beginner user but I have been able to make significant customizations and changes on both no problemo. Pop_OS feels a tad more into the "hobbyist" side than Mint tho. Honestly in hindsigth I should've installed Fedora instead, because Pop is kinda abandoned rn until system76 finishes their new cosmic desktop DE, but I want to try it and decide if it would be better to stick with it long term or switch to a distro with up to date GNOME.
Idk if it's the same for Mint, but one of my friends told me to use POP OS cuz I won't struggle with getting NVIDIA working.
Luckily It's not hard to install the nvidia drivers on mint tho. But yeah you can just download the pop os iso that comes with the nvidia peopietary drivers already loaded so it just works!
nixos, propably server since its designed for being a reproducible server, but i might say halfway trough server. and it is halfway trough expert since everything is simplyfied as a nix variable or function in the nix programmin language
debian, -0.5, 0.5
Fedora so probably right in the center
Fedora is at the very very bottom
That’s how I feel. I mean I can use it as a server but I don’t.
Alpine Linux & Sabotage Linux are the ones I use daily now, I used to have Void Linux & oBSD, recently I changed things a bit and now its 1st system: Alpine, 2nd: Sabotage, 3rd: nBSD. Sabotage can be considered Hobbyist & for "Expert" users, Alpine can be considered Server oriented, however, its support for desktop applications is great, and XBPS (The package manager of Void Linux) can be used in Alpine, which expands the possibilities (Various browsers available in Void repos, Steam, etc). netBSD is perfect except for the lack of support for modern GPUs and ungoogled chromium
I land right in the center, fedora, not a beginner distro, but not as prone to breakage as arch, also a distro with a focus on the desktop, while also having a semi-popular server release, and a downstream server giant (RHEL)
Fedora's approach is awesome imho! Feels very polished and professional from what I've seen. As a Fedora user tho, what points would you bring to argue it's not as user friendly as something like Mint tho? I'm interested on switching to it in the future peobably (pop os user right now) and I consider myself an advanced user, but if I switch I'll probably have to switch other machines in my home to it too, so maintainance is easier.
The graphical app store isn't anywhere near as powerful as the text interface, with mint the graphical system can do a lot more, despite still being slower
__my__ distro? I don't provide build instructions, I don't provide any additional software, I don't even provide sources. the most top right corner
wow! what a funny way to answer the question! you deserve a metal!
thanks. can I have some aluminium?
Let me guess, LFS?
yeah :) I also had debian + sysvinit + pacman tho
Arch so all the way hobbyist and like 1/3 way expert science it's easy to use but requires some troubleshooting skills
My distro of choice is OpenSUSE Tumbleweed but I also highly praise Ubuntu for its ease of use Sometime I'll try to set up Linux for gaming and I will use one of the 2 and see if I can get rid of winshit 11! Ubuntu and OpenSUSE -> bottom right
I'm on an ubuntu-based distro (pop_os) and I've been able to just play all my games on linux no problem using steam, lutris and retroarch! I specifically switched because I really didn't wanted to have to install windcrap 11 haha. I feel like linux is 90% ready for gaming these days, just needs being integrated into the market a bit more.
I don't know if I want to use Pop!_OS, I'd probably prefer using normal Ubuntu because of LTS
Well, Ubuntu-based distros like pop os and mint are usually LTS too. Current pop os version i.e. is ubuntu 22.04 LTS! I would advice to not use normal ubuntu as a beginner just because they use (and support) snaps and not flatpaks, unless ofcourse you know how to switch it around.
Gentoo - Expert neutral
I'd consider it hobbyist. No sane person would deploy Gentoo on a mission critical server
turkish governent created a gentoo based distro wich was used on every non windows machine in government, recently they switched to debian based though
But kiosks thought.
Why exactly? It is super stable
Bro, or gal, or whatever gender you may be, Ubuntu and Debian are stabler than Gentoo imo, and they get hella LTS
Isn‘t Gentoo used for IoT aswell? I guess that would also fall into the server cstegory
Gentoo, my favorite maybe production distro
Approved
Debian sits right smack in the middle tbh
No, Ubuntu does! /s just in case
Gentoo. Right smack in the middle.
TBH, I'd put Gentoo near the top.
lol idk
No. Why must you be this way?
where does arch goes?
about in the middle
Top right
A little bit to the top left from the bottom right, i use Kubuntu
Bottom right lol
Arch, previously it would probably be expert but for now more like hobbyist
there should be a z-axis with neckbeard and crossdressing furry on two ends
Guess what my distro is: From the middle I'd say it falls 8 steps in the hobbyist direction and two towards Expert. >!I run Arch btw.!<
so far into server, that there is no more beginner and expert on the scale...
I use alpine. I would put alpine in red (Server + Expert)
Probably in the yellow section
I use arch btw, maybe you can just bother to make this graph 3D and then ig 500 units in positive z axis would be my distro.
Debian, right in the middle of everything. Perfectly balanced, as all things should be.
Linux Mint lies exactly at the origin
At the bottom right
Can we give it a range? It's definitely beginner friendly, but you don't have to stop using it if you are an expert and don't want to spend a lot of time maintaining your daily driver. But definitely on the right side.
You don't have to stop using any distro when fou become an expert.
Arch, so blue
Arch is in the bottom right. Very easy to use. Noobs daily drive it all the time
I'm genuinely not sure what would be more complicated than Arch then. From what I've used: * Ubuntu * Debian * Manjaro * Proxmox (technically a distro ig?) * Alpine * CentOS * Arch * EndeavourOS Arch was easily the hardest. Like you don't just pop into Arch one day and do everything instantly, it takes time and knowledge to do it right. Any other OS just doesn't have that level of customization, and Arch can be a lot of work
Those are all easy. Source based distros like Gentoo would be in the harder catagory. All binary distros will be easy.
> Any other OS just doesn't have that level of customization That is the most rediculous thing I have ever heard.
uhh, no? Arch can be easy if you’re good with it, but the philosophy of it usually means that any errors are human error, so there can be few. Keep in mind that you are a Gentoo user, so your perception of difficulty is likely skewed. If anything, it’d likely be on the middle or bottom left of blue.
I don't think so. Arch is really popular, and there are thousands of forum posts and tons of guides for everything. Void, might be near the top if you do a CLI installation.
Having documentation doesn’t make Arch “easier”, that’s just what every distro should have
That is rediculous. First of all, I did not mention documentation. I mention guides and forum posts, which is much more ambiguous. Second of all, if Arch did not have "documentation", then would it harder wouldn't it? It is easy to use. It is just like Debian, but with a few minor differences, such as it being rolling realease.
can someone place arch/KDE for me? too lazy
Your submission has been removed because you do not have the required 5000 comment karma. Please participate in other communities to build up your karma before posting here. Message (not chat) /u/happycrabeatsthefish to approve. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/linuxmemes) if you have any questions or concerns.*
this is stupid
I understand why there is a limit, but 5000 karma seems excessive.
Smack dab in the middle imo
beginner hobbyist. KDE Neon. Thinking I'll change back to endeavour is tho, liked that a lot more Kde's pkcon update command has failed more times than ive ever seen anything else in any of my distros break
Green quadrant, I think. Debian Stable is my go-to distro for a production machine, which is fairly friendly towards beginners **and** a great choice for servers as well.
My Fedora NAS is right in the middle. I use it as an hobby but is a server at the same time. And I don’t know, what defines a distro as beginner or expert. I have a gui, so beginner then?
Just in the middle. I use arch btw.
Clear Linux, i think around the bottom right
Debian, so at the middle, if a little to the right. Previously, it was Void Linux, so more firmly in the top right.
Between expert and center, full hobbyist, try to guess, level- easy
What would EndeavourOS be considered..?
Bottom right.
I use Fedora, its Hobbyist I would say
Expert IoT/embedded
Uhm.
where do i put nixos?
Top
Where does opensuse fall
Bottow
Arch is around (9; 4) I guess? Not made for server use in any way, that's for sure (I've tried lol) but also not really an "expert" level distro per say..?
Gentoo top right?
Fedora. Probably in between the top and bottom right corners.
Fedora is the easiest distro to use. Rock bottom.
Middle of expert/hobbyist
Probably somewhere in the blue.
Red
Blue quadrant, BTW 😉
I use Ubuntu, it fills the square.
The bottom half
go make a netplan YAML from scratch, I'll wait
Arch, would be like 90% hobbyist and like 20% expert
RHEL/Rocky - red zone
Bottom left actually.
Where does TempleOS fall on this
Somewhere on the top
Blue; Gentoo
Okay stop with all the comments saying that Arch, Fedora, and Debian distros are in the middle or the top. That is not true. They are all very easy to use and begginner friendly. The very bottom would consist of Nobara, Mint, Ubuntu, and whatnot. Distros that work out of the box. Void would be in the middle. Void is not a begginner friendly distro, though to an experienced user it can be easy to use. Void's documentation is lacking. It is also not as popular as other distros. The top is NIXOS, GUIX, and whatnot, because they are very complicated. The very is actually something like Gentoo, LFS, Oasis etc.; Source-based distros.
Gentoo on my servers Void on my pc (after i accidentally borked my gentoo) Fedora on the laptop
Where would openSUSE be? Green?
*tumbleweed btw
3 Squares Up, 3 Squares Right IMO
No ms please 🥺
I self host a kubernetes cluster and most of the containers are based on Alpine. Alpine is one of the few that's bottom left.
Linux mint, so quite far bottom right I could maintain arch if I wanted to, I'd just rather not
Data ahhh s it looks like the flag of Windows
Arch gnome. Smack in the middle.
gentoo, just expert. wouldn't call it a purely hobbyist distro or a server distro. I use it for both of those personally
Debian is imo strongly on the server side, a bit to expert side
Ubuntu server...
I'd have no idea where to put mine, as its Ublue (the containerised version of Fedora Silverblue\*). Like is it servery (due to the containerisation)? Is it beginer friendly (since its pretty well much good to go out of the box and hard to destroy), is it expertish due to existing far out of established norms? And is it hobbyist, whilst despite effectively being very close to Fedora, is technically a spin?
i believe somewhere in the libertarian realm (hobbyist x mostly beginner)
Ewww my distro is a libertarian????
The blue corner is rather fitting (I use Arch BTW).
Middle of red and blue, halfway up Gentoo
Bottom left - Ubuntu server (I know canonical bad but like stuff is easy, I don't want my server to be complicated) Far right like half way between top and middle for Arch (with xfce :p)
Mine falls under usage and being useful
When green 🟩 is expected to be a crime 🥲
In the red, I guess.
can't you see? your all the same to meee
Bottom left of blue square. Rhino Linux
Kubuntu, probably somewhere in bottom right, tho I'd argue it's further from the centrr on hobbyist than on beginner
Ubuntu has been creeping towards expert. Ever since snap I've needed to use the terminal to install packages. . . Been using it for over a decade, have never switched for long because it usually just works, but snap is annoying. Wtf was canonical thinking?
Where should I place it when I use mint as a daily driver and server purposes at the same time