Could we add "Distrochooser" to the sidebar?
Could we add "Distrochooser" to the sidebar?
The Distrochooser helps you to find the suitable Linux distribution based on your needs!
Quite a few posts about selecting a distro to use. Maybe it's time to make that link a little more prominent?
Oh boy here we go again
Distrochooser is not a good resource for newbies IMO. There are too many questions, many of which are misleading or hard to understand (NOBODY taking this knows what systemd is)
Many answers are misleasing: "I want a distro that is supported by game publishers" for example implies each distro has its own game compatibility, this is NOT the case.
And when you're finally done it recommends too many distros, many of which are irrelevant, niche, or flat out not recommended anymore (PCLinuxOS?!?!)
When someone asks for a distro, please just run a random number generator to choose between ZorinOS, PopOS, or Linux Mint. If someone is only gaming, maybe include Nobara too.
Exactly! Many of the criteria included aren't all that good for new users, and neither are the suggestions. It's not really a good resource for experienced users either.
One of us could probably put that together pretty quickly lol
But if we did want to build a new distro recommender... Maybe there are like 5 or so questions that would be relevant.
Just off the top of my head some possibilities:
If you're a beginner, Mint is a good choice. One could argue Ubuntu (noobs don't gaf about snap if they even know what it is). I think noobs would want good GUI tools and a very popular, very polished distro. So issues are infrequent but finding answers is easy.
Into gaming? There's a few distros that come up like Nobara. (I've seen Manjaro mentioned but idk).
If you want something that looks kinda like macos there's Endeavor. Does anyone recommend that one these days? I don't usually see it mentioned.
Idk.
You're probably right, an rng that chooses between a few distros might be better lol
Exactly. If you have to ask this sort of question, the answer is those three. Everything else is just confusing.
Yeah, I disagree. It's the least subjective resource I can find as nobody asks the questions on that questionnaire here. I'd much prefer it if people used distrochooser and then shared their answers (e.g https://distrochooser.de/en/d5b60b6e6134/), wrote some extra stuff e.g "I want NVIDIA support because I want CUDA" or something, and based on that, we recommend distros. Instead of the herd mentality of "duh, linux mint stoopeed"
Permanently Deleted
That avoiding systemd is even a choise is nuts
I really want to know what the crossover is on people who know what systemd is, much less have any actual reason to decide they wish to actively avoid it, and those who would find this the best way of determining their next distro. That has to be a vanishingly small group of people.
Keep in mind that you are an experienced user of linux.
This site is probably about people who are both inexperienced, and also may not have time to adequately learn the system the way you have.
And no, as someone who has gone through Fedora, Mint, and Arch, saying they're for "everyone" just assumes everyone is going to use linux the same way you do. Which is a huge mistake. Arch didn't even have a normal installer up until a year ago, the process even with the arch wiki guide is completely unwieldy for most users to do. Many distros disable popular codecs by default, which a lot of users wouldn't have the patience for. Some will have Nvidia drivers for up to date for gaming, and some won't.
And most of all, you're also running new users into the choice dilemma, where there's so many options they just won't know what to pick.
Permanently Deleted
Fedora is not for everyone. I think the assessment of that site is correct. When I first installed it, it came with KDE and Wayland installed. Wayland couldn't share screens at the time and my webcam didn't work. Which new user has the time to understand the difference between X11 and Wayland? I also wanted to install OBSStudio and finding an rpm repo was no fun at all.
In the end, I uninstalled Fedora.
I agree that Fedora's habit for pushing (sometimes breaking) changes is definitely something to keep an eye out. However, it has been so good over the last (almost) two years. I would even argue that Fedora has become more self-conscious of the consequences and (especially) how this might affect their more casual user base.
Btw, how long ago did you try out Fedora? FWIW, Fedora (Silverblue; to be more precise[1]) was the first distro that I've tried and while I've had some experiences with other distros over time (mostly through dual boot), Fedora (Atomic) seems to have become the distro I call home.
- It's probably not as masochistic as you might think for a new user 😅. Though I'd have to say that it took some effort, control and discipline to not instantly go back to Windows (or any other Linux distro for that matter).
While I get why distrochooser.de is romanticized, in its current iteration it's simply not very good and anyone that is somewhat well-versed in how different distros operate and how Distrochooser works, will tell you the same. At best, it provides some orientation into what some of the more common distros are. But it fails to answer some fundamental questions in the process; like:
- What is the relation between a distro and its derivative and (more importantly) how does that matter to a user?
- How exactly does a distribution's chosen release model affect software and updates? And while we're into that, what's even the difference between the "stable" used when talking about point release distros that opt to freeze packages over longer periods of time vs the "stable" that's brought up in conversations regarding update concerns and how they might break software (I'm honestly not even sure if the one(s) responsible for writing the parts of Distrochooser even know(s) themselves)[1].
There are a lot of other fundamental questions that are involved in the decision for picking a distro that would have made a lot more sense than the ones found on Distrochooser. E.g. Do you use an Nvidia GPU and want this to cause no issues in the process of installation and is this your biggest concern? If yes: then just use Pop!_OS. Otherwise, move on to the other questions etc. I think the fact that a flowchart isn't used for some uses and that ultimately priorities aren't brought up to finalize the decision are the two biggest issues that Distrochooser has in its current iteration.
And we haven't even gone over the many distros that despite having little to no user base are still included in the results, while (more recent) 'staples' like Garuda and Nobara are clearly left out for reasons most likely related to the maintainers not being able to keep up with the Linux landscape. Which, to be fair, is quite hard; so I don't blame them. I, in fact, applaud them for their continued contributions and hope that some day it will become something that we can proudly present to others for their first orientation.
Allow me to end this with a question to OP:
- Do you feel the same way about excellent websites like DistroWatch.com and DistroSea?[2]
- If yes; Why didn't you make a similar post for either of the two instead?
- If no; Why not?
- Sure, there is some overlap in what they mean and how they're used, but it's a very important distinction; otherwise openSUSE's stable rolling release designation for their Tumbleweed wouldn't make any sense.
- If anything, I think these two actually make more sense to be included.
IMO you're thinking too much as an advanced user for a simple user. The only point I agree on is the NVIDIA GPU. If you feel up to it, contribute. The website's code is on Github https://github.com/distrochooser/distrochooser
I've never heard of nor used Garuda. As I said, feel free to contribute.
Do you feel the same way about excellent websites like DistroWatch.com and DistroSea?
Never heard of DistroSea. It seem like a good complement to DistroChooser. It works for most usecases:
- narrow down what fits for you by answering a questionnaire (DistroChooser)
- if you feel like it, test a few of the suggested distros from the questionnaire on DistroSea
DistroWatch as useful as statista.com for suggesting your next travel destination. If you had to travel somewhere and had a list of criteria, but didn't want to spend all day researching, would you go to a travel agent or open an encyclopedia?
I think many in the community, like yourself, have forgotten what it's like to give just enough of a fuck to change something but not to want to be too invested. A beginner isn't going to want to understand why a system is stable or not: they just want a stable system. You don't have to explain to them "Yeah, so the configuration is a file, you see? Only you edit that file. Then you run this command that interprets the file and build a dependency tree, downloads everything necessary, to a partition that's temporarily mounted as read-write, symlinks to....". Nobody cares. The average user DGAF.
Imagine if you just wanted to get a vacuum cleaner at the store with 3 criteria. Imagine you don't give a rat's ass about vacuum cleaner. You just want to point the thing at the ground, let it succ all the bits, but as quietly as possible, and not break down in 2 years to force you back out here. But the sales person you get harps on about the genius of the person who invented some internal component you've never heard of, goes on to explain why, ideologically, getting a certain brand is the only way because blablablabla. Maybe you'd buy a vacuum cleaner just to shut them up or walk out of the store.
My optimal experience would be the sales person listening to me, lining up the best candidates, and explaining, in bullet points, why they are there. Then finally, ask me if I have a favorite and to give me a test environment. If I don't understand something, I can ask more questions.- narrow down options --> DistroChooser
- test them --> DistroSea
- more questions --> right here
Thank you for your response. But our conversation seems so far somewhat inefficient. And I fear it might be due to reasons related to the XY problem. Therefore, before I reply to the points made in the above comment, I would like to ask you if you could state the following:
- Ultimately, what are you trying to achieve (and why); what is the problem even?
- What is your solution to this problem? And where does adding Distrochooser to the sidebar come into plan? Have you perhaps thought of other possible solutions and why they might be inferior to the suggested one?
Thank you in advance!
I got bored 😅. So here is my second response. But please, before reading this one, consider reading my other reply first. It's a lot shorter anyways 😅.
So fundamentally, I think we're misunderstanding one another. In your defense, I can understand it; as I'm just one of the many responders and you might simply not have been able to take the time to understand what it is that I'm trying to convey and why. In my case, I think it might be related to the XY problem; i.e. you're proposing a solution (adding Distrochooser to the sidebar) for which hope will resolve an issue that remains to be stated. For all we know, you actually try to solve something else and you perceive Distrochooser in being capable of playing a vital role in that without being aware of how else the actual problem should be tackled instead.
In this reply I will try to bridge the gap that might have made you misunderstand what I tried to say in my first comment under your original post.
IMO you’re thinking too much as an advanced user for a simple user.
I think you might be absolutely right. The thing is, though, that I have never been one of those users that post a question like "Which distro?" without providing anything beyond the most basic specifics.
Some insights from my personal Linux journey
(FWIW, this is me. And this was more of a last-ditch effort in hopes of finding something to dual boot into. By contrast, for my first distro I had spent a week of my free time digging through (video-)guides and Reddit threads until I had dismissed everything besides the distro I landed on. It seems that I did a good enough job as I'm still confidently using it. And while I've used and experimented with other distros since (mostly as a dual boot), my first distro is the only one I refer to as home. And the interesting part is that I'm fully aware that chances are very slim that a random bystander would ever have suggested me (as a newbie) the use of Fedora Atomic. So by doing the research myself, I've actually enabled myself to start with my ideal distro from the get-go. And yes; that means I've revisited my choice a couple of times by now, but every revisit just made me more confident in my choice.
The only point I agree on is the NVIDIA GPU.
I therefore assume you disagree not with the entire post (as you seem to be taking a liking to DistroSea), but instead refer to the parts in which I go over some more fundamental questions. I think you've missed what I tried to say with that and have also missed the hint[1] to make more clear why I even said those things.
Alright, let's dismiss for a moment that the Distrochooser's questions themselves need a lot of work done and proceed right to a 'results-screen'. This is probably how I would fill it in on an average day*. In the very first sentence, we're confronted with the word stable without giving any useful information on what this means and why this is even mentioned here. Similarly, the word unstable is used without ensuring that the (potential) newbie actually has a proper understanding of what it stands for. According to your logic[2] these things shouldn't even matter! So why does Distrochooser even bother to spend a sentence on this for every one of their entries? And that's why I actually agree with you! But if Distrochooser chooses to include it, then they at least have to be precise and elaborate on what they mean with this and why the new user should care. So, to be clear, my two bullet points weren't meant as "Distrochooser should definitely somehow include these as they're vital to their choice.", but instead it was meant as "Alright, if this format for Distrochooser is chosen (with all of its faults), then the least Distrochooser should do is provide information on what the points (and used terms/words/phrases) in the 'results-screen' actually mean for the newbie user. And if it's not addressed, then this automatically discredits Distrochooser as a reliable introduction/orientation to distros for new users.". Because as it stands, a lot of the small niche distros that happen to be derivatives of Debian/Ubuntu are regarded as somehow "stable" while something like Fedora isn't. And thus the newbie that just wants a stable system will be fooled/misled into using any of those fringe distros over Fedora. Which is just straight up BS.
I’ve never heard of nor used Garuda. As I said, feel free to contribute.
Don't worry, others already took care of that. The fact that it hasn't been implemented yet just shows that this is not a productive endeavor. On that note, I didn't even notice how Garuda's more popular sibling EndeavourOS is also absent in Distrochooser's results...
Never heard of DistroSea. It seem like a good complement to
DistroChooseranything that narrows down choiceFixed that for you. Especially considering the fact that Distrochooser is (perhaps) more misleading than anything else. This point is a dead horse by now (at least under this post of yours), but I will be more elaborate at a later point.
DistroWatch as useful as statista.com for suggesting your next travel destination. If you had to travel somewhere and had a list of criteria, but didn’t want to spend all day researching, would you go to a travel agent or open an encyclopedia?
The response on this depends on the XY problem, therefore I will refrain from commenting on this for now.
I think many in the community, like yourself, have forgotten what it’s like to give just enough of a fuck to change something but not to want to be too invested. A beginner isn’t going to want to understand why a system is stable or not: they just want a stable system. You don’t have to explain to them “Yeah, so the configuration is a file, you see? Only you edit that file. Then you run this command that interprets the file and build a dependency tree, downloads everything necessary, to a partition that’s temporarily mounted as read-write, symlinks to…”. Nobody cares. The average user DGAF.
Imagine if you just wanted to get a vacuum cleaner at the store with 3 criteria. Imagine you don’t give a rat’s ass about vacuum cleaner. You just want to point the thing at the ground, let it succ all the bits, but as quietly as possible, and not break down in 2 years to force you back out here. But the sales person you get harps on about the genius of the person who invented some internal component you’ve never heard of, goes on to explain why, ideologically, getting a certain brand is the only way because blablablabla. Maybe you’d buy a vacuum cleaner just to shut them up or walk out of the store.
These two paragraphs are at best you misunderstanding/misinterpreting what I said and why I said those things and that's where I'll leave it (for now).
My optimal experience would be the sales person listening to me, lining up the best candidates, and explaining, in bullet points, why they are there. Then finally, ask me if I have a favorite and to give me a test environment. If I don’t understand something, I can ask more questions.
Generally-speaking, I agree with this. But I hope you're not (even remotely) insinuating that this is even remotely close to the Distrochooser experience.
- Hint: "I’m honestly not even sure if the one(s) responsible for writing the parts of Distrochooser even know(s) themselves" from my first reply.
- "A beginner isn’t going to want to understand why a system is stable or not: they just want a stable system." and "Nobody cares. The average user DGAF."
Distro chooser recommends nowadays non existent distros and arch to beginners you are saying "you are thinking too much as an afvanced user blah blah" It is important to know üf your disyro supports the hardware you use thta's not afvanced and I also saw you call people who recommend mintaffecyed bu "herd mentality". It is recommended because it is easy for new users stop romanticising an unfinished tool.
In addition, to what everyone has already said, Distrochooser is just bad. It will often pull the stupid card, like this one:
Let's not. It's not a good tool.
Why not?
At first I was with this but the first set of questions is so stupid that I can't see that being a good idea.
Somebody just code up a bot that picks a random mainstream distro everytime somebody asks "what distro should I use?"
Permanently Deleted
Have you seen the Reddit Linux communities? People don’t care how many tools or useful information you present them. They will ask the SAME “which distro” questions day after day after day.
There are 3 reasons you see repeat posts.
- They are extremely lazy and can't be bothered to find their way through a maze of information.
- The maze of information is legitimately confusing and they need help. But they are bad at formulating good questions so it looks like point #1. I very rarely see people take the time to explain what they've tried and why they failed.
- They want a conversation and getting their question answered is only one half of it.
Also one other thing I noticed is that if you do form a good question and create a wall of text, it can also scare people away. So people deliberately ask very vague questions and then slowly reveal more as they get asked for specifics. At that point you've hooked some people, they are a little more invested in helping and you can info dump on them.
wall of text, can also scare people away.
I don’t think that’s the case at all. Wall of text usually means you’ve covered the basics, did your research and are looking for a specific answer to a very specific question. That’s how the real world of troubleshooting works when you ask questions professionally. If you don’t get an answer it’s because they probably don’t know. You covered the basics and people are tired from work all day and not looking to start up a war room.
That's what bots are for: an automated response like "have you tried XXX? share the link to the results here with additional information if you think the questionnaire didn't consider an aspect important to you".
It's a soft response without banning anybody.
I like distro chooser, but the analysis seems off. It always recommends some mainstream distro that I end up hating after extended use. I've finally found one I like, but it was through brute force, not from some list somewhere or from asking in forums.
Distro chooser is bad, so nah
Nah, I think just recommending the most popular distro is usually best because when new users do run into issues there are years of forums that has probably answered their question before and is just one search away
According to distrowatch for a couple of years going MX/linux is nearly twice as popular as the second most popular.
MX were part of the mepis community antiX belonged to too, with more than a decade of history and body of forum discussion.
