New Linux user, here is my use case. Distro recommendations?
New Linux user, here is my use case. Distro recommendations?
Update 1: Thanks for all the responses! I've gotten a lot of very good comments saying I should stick with Mint, and that's sitting comfortably in my top two picks right now. Between new distros, I'm most interested in Arch's rolling release model, as it provides some benefits for me for reasons I didn't really get into here. I'll be considering Manjaro Plasma as my leading "new" pick, and am considering EndeavourOS and rolling releases of other distros as other alternatives. I'll mostly be weighing my options between sticking with Mint Cinnamon, switching to Manjaro Plasma, and setting up my Mint install with Plasma for now. Many thanks to those that have responded, and to any new commenters, feel free to add your own thoughts!
Update 2: After trying out EOS, Arch, Manjaro, OpenSUSE Tumbleweed and Universal Blue, among many other options, I've come to the decision that I'm okay with sticking to Mint for now on my main desktop and setting up UBlue Aurora on my work laptop, but might consider switching to Kubuntu or Fedora if I want something similar at work and at home (one of my main draws away from Mint was that it didn't offer a KDE option), or to OpenSUSE Tumbleweed if I must have a rolling distro for some reason. Thank you all for your guidance, and happy distro hopping!
Hey all! I've lurked here for a while and not really posted anything, but here goes.
Title says most of it. I'm a hardware nut with a little programming background knowledge, who built my own beefy desktop about 3 years ago. I started on Windows 10, but I made the switch a few months ago and haven't looked back. I was worried about how much trouble I might have with Linux given my limited software background, and picked more beginner-friendly distros to start out. I toyed with Ubuntu for the first couple weeks before switching to Mint, and I've now been a happy Mint user for several months with no big hiccups. I'm a little bolder and wiser now, though, and I feel like I can still get more out of Linux by jumping to a more unstable and tweakable distro. I was hoping you'd have some suggestions - and knowing the nature of the Linux community, lots of options to consider. :)
Here's what I'd like in a distro:
- Tweakable. I like having lots of settings, and one of the things I liked most about Mint was how much more customization I could get than Windows. I like config and setting things up to my unique tastes, and knowing that many people say this is a weaker aspect of Mint, I'm interested in what other distros have to offer.
- GUI-friendly. I'd like to learn the Terminal, but I'm not confident enough in it just yet to use it for everything. Making my GUI look good and setting it up to fit my tastes are also important to me, and I liked Cinnamon's slick UI/UX features like Hot Corners and panel applets. I don't necessarily want something that imitates Cinnamon OR Windows, or even need anything outstanding in a UI, but having something more than Spartan would be much appreciated.
- Well-documented. I'm still new to Linux; I'll need a lot of help getting used to its quirks. I've been interested in Arch because of what people say about its documentation. A good wiki to follow and readily available answers for my nooby questions may be the deciding factor on whether I stick with a distro and spin/flavor/etc or move on.
- Reasonable gaming compatibility. My library is small, I don't play a lot, and all the games I'm serious about run with only a couple hiccups on Mint with Proton, Lutris, and Mesa. Most of what I do is browse the Internet, write in LibreOffice or equivalent, check my email in Thunderbird or equivalent, and maybe open GIMP or a game once in a while. I'm not so serious about how my games run, I just wouldn't want to daily drive a distro that's handily much worse than Mint for gaming, and would prefer a rolling distro or one with frequent updates, so I have the latest drivers. Anything significantly better for gaming is a plus, not expected. I've been interested in Nobara and Arch for different reasons, but I'd like to look at all my options before I pick one, including other distros I haven't heard of or looked into. Thoughts?
Okay, there will be people disagreeing with me, but I can't let a new user be misled by us nerds talking distros all day.
So, you want to choose a distro because you expect it to do things differently than your current one? Thing is: Ultimately, they (mostly) don't differ that much, really. There are extremely few things one distro can do that you cannot do in any other distro. Yes, some files will be in different places, they might use special versions for some packages (which often can be overridden) or use older and more stable versions of stuff (Debian). Yet, in the end, they are all the same OS. They all use the same window managers, the same kernels, the same drivers (mostly), the same logic behind many things. Another distro only feels really different, when you know a lot about the ins and outs of Linux systems. If you don't, the difference will often be that you have to type either "pacman" or "apt", or either change /etc/program.conf or /etc/program.d/foo.conf.
Play with the distro you already have and like. You ain't missing anything. Just don't get the wrong idea that Distros are like windows: monolithic monsters that can't be really changed. Like mint but want Gnome as window manager? Go for it. Dislike the way the standard terminal software does colors? Get another one. Don't like how Program X does some GUI thing? There will almost always an alternative that just plugs into your system exactly as the preinstalled one did.
A distribution is basically just a pre-selection of packages that can be changed at will. Hell, you could in theory get pacman on Debian or Apt on Arch. I don't know why you'd want to, but in theory you could.
Don't waste your time reinstalling your machine. Play with the things you already have!
Well said. Also, "tweakability" is ultimately going to be the same for any distro. Like you said the more beginner-friendly ones like Mint just start with some common tweaks already in place.
OP, do you know about GNOME extensions? It's not something the Jedi will usually tell you about. But it's a great start to the rabbit hole for newbies.
Great points, all in this thread! Yes, I'm aware of GNOME extensions, and I'm considering sticking with Mint more seriously now, given the response. I think the broader point here is very sage advice, and most users at this point in their Linux journeys, including me, need to hear that. I do intend to try out other distros in a VirtualBox VM for at least a week or so before nuking my current Mint install - however long it takes for me to be sure it's a better fit than Mint, which I imagine that many candidates won't be. For instance, I've decided from a quick try at Arch in a VM that it's still a good ways over my head - and may never be right for me, which is fine. I can say I've tried it now, and trying different things is good. Such is the nature of the beast! :-)
I'm not expecting a huge difference between my Mint Cinnamon and something like Manjaro KDE Plasma (the most interesting option to me right now.) I'm a tinkerer at heart, though, and while I'm not experienced enough with Linux yet to appreciate the differences for what they are, I do fancy myself the kind of person to care about those things... as soon as I figure them out, that is. :-)
While I understand now that I'm unlikely to see much of a UX change by hopping distro - thanks all! - I'm now mostly interested in an Arch-derived distro like Manjaro because I feel like its rolling release model is better suited to my personal tastes than Mint and the Ubuntu umbrella's stable releases, good as Mint has been to me. It's largely a preference thing for me, though, and I'll be investigating further before deciding whether it's what I want.
I've been thinking about this for a while now and you've just answered my question so clearly! Thank you.
Glad I could help :)
Something with KDE would be ideal for you. I personally use fedora, as it has a very modern yet fairly stable software cycle with one major release every semester
You sound like a future Arch user, BTW
I toyed with Ubuntu for the first couple weeks before switching to Mint, and I’ve now been a happy Mint user for several months with no big hiccups. I’m a little bolder and wiser now, though, and I feel like I can still get more out of Linux by jumping to a more unstable and tweakable distro.
Stick with mint.
This is exactly why I hate it when people describe some distros as "beginner friendly". Because they're also "expert friendly". There isn't anything you can't do with Mint that you could do with another distro.
happy Mint user for several months
In this case I recommend Mint.
Distro hopping gets addictive and honestly if you're happy with where you are i wouldnt recommend you switch anything.
Buuuuut if you're going to do it anyways EndeavourOS. Its arch for begginers you can branch out to more complex things if you want but the install is painless and works out the box. Arch is in general VERY customizable but its a double edged sword so having guardrails during the setup is helpful.
I actually dont understand this.
I tried Manjaro and sticked with KDE.
Used all the Ubuntu and Debian variants but they always broke.
But I simply sticked with Fedora Kinoite because the KDE packages are normally up to date, not like on Kubuntu. So the 103 bugs I reported that are still open will possibly get fixed and I actually get the fixes, and the already closed issues will also arrive at my system.
But at the same time if I have an issue it is very like an upstream KDE one.
I will never need to reinstall or unbreak my system again.
That is not hopping, its just "finding something that works (with KDE)".
Arch with enforced full snapper snapshots may be okay but I dont think it is good. Same with OpenSUSE tumbleweed which is similar. Both are worse for stability than rpm-ostree Fedora.
If I used GNOME I guess many more distros would work.
Iirc manjaros problem is that its half arch in that it does staggered updates which doesnt mesh well with aur.
EndeavourOS handles the install so you dont have go through a complicated install just like manjaro does. But from there you basically have a barebones arch install with no staggered updates or anything. So all the kde packages should be up to date there too.
I did try manjaro forst and ditched it but i dont remember why.
I do use gnome though so take this with a grain of salt.
I can say I've never had a stability issue with arch though.
I've taken a good look at Endeavour, and it might be a winner for me! Admittedly, the terminal focus might be a bit much for me to start out, but it seems a lot more approachable than bare Arch, and I got comfortable with pacman and the other basics in an evening of messing with it in a a VM (with the Arch and EOS docs both being very helpful!) It just might be the push I need to let go of my reliance on GUI left over from Windows :-)
I ran various Ubuntu flavors, Mint, Pop!, and Debian on a wide array of devices for almost a decade before switching my gaming rig to EndeavourOS last year. I didn't appreciate the snap package issues I was having, and the AUR is an excellent tool to have in the box.
I tried straight arch and probably would have stuck with it if I hadn't royally borked up my audio during the pulseaudio/pipewire transition. I practically live in the command line, but I'm happy to let a well-appointed installer deal with the menial stuff, especially with the knowledge that I'll inevitably have to reinstall someday. It's not like there's a shortage of shit to mess with or a dearth of dumb mistakes I'll make. No matter what you choose, my best advice is to make a separate partition for both home and root. At the very least, that'll give you the ability to easily evaluate different distros or reinstall without worry.
IME running newer kernels tends to be a boon for newer hardware and arch-based distros in particular are a good choice for gaming due to the rise of the Steam Deck. I still prefer Debian on servers and SBCs. Probably never going back to Ubuntu again. YMMV.
If you're worried about using the terminal you could always install one of the frontends for pacman like the one Manjaro uses. Manjaro might be a pain if you're using AUR packages (really depends on what packages you use, some niche ones like specific game modloaders or the professional JetBrains IDEs are only on the AUR) because Manjaro's repos are delayed by around 2 weeks, but the AUR isn't delayed at all. Depending on the packages you're using that could break updates sometimes.
Depending on how familiar with programming you are you could also try NixOS which has an absurd number of packages in their official repo but NixOS's config files can be kind of a pain sometimes.
Edit:
It's also worth noting that you could start off with Manjaro and then jump over to something like EndeavourOS/Arch once you get more familiarized with using the terminal down the line. That way you wouldn't have to relearn commands/setups when you switch, since they're ultimately all arch-based and have the same underlying structure.
From what you describe you're still a Linux beginner so it's going to be a big hike in difficulty if you switch to Arch. Stick to Mint and keep customizing your desktop and using Linux for now. The desktop environments are the same on every distro, there's nothing that you can do on Arch that you can't do on Mint.
You can of course try Arch or any distro side by side with Mint, in a VM or a container or on another partition, just don't nuke your Mint install yet.
Anything with KDE Plasma 6.
I highly recommend Fedora Kinoite.
If you want gaming, use Bazzite which is based on Kinoite.
Read my comments on previous posts where I mention the reasons.
Atomic Fedora is just way better than everything else in the categories I need. (It is very stable, while not actually shipping "stable" i.e. randomly frozen packages. The packages are tested but up to date, and the distro packaging mechanism is rock solid and near unbreakable).
Tweakability isn’t a weaker aspect of Mint. Cinnamon has fewer options than KDE, but more than many. The Xfce and Mate variants also offer a lot of options, with sane and usable defaults.
Anything with KDE will have customization options up the wazoo. The rest isn’t so different between distributions, especially if you aren’t trying to use the terminal much.
Popos is coming our a new desktop environment this year. Many Linux enjoyer's are looking to see how that goes.
But yeah as others have said. Mint is a great distro. If it works, why fuck with it?
eh, i am a firm believe in if it aint broke, dont fix it.
im still on mint for app curation/compatibility. i have yet to have a process/task/server product not function as i need it to on mint. im up to 6 machines and a few 'servers'.
I wonder what I keep doing wrong with Linux mint. It just doesn't work for me lol. But I hope it works better for you!
It definitely helps that I'm on very compatible hardware (all AMD) :-) But I was also lucky not to have any of the installation hiccups many seem to, just make bootable drive with Rufus/Balena, launch from in BIOS, profit - maybe some people have a green thumb for their distros of choice, who's to say?
I was running a live version from my USB, and all I was trying to do was install wine.... i first tried the built in software store but that didn't work. Then I tried installing through command line and that didn't work. I tried several different times and zilch. The first time I loaded up ubuntu I got wine working without a problem. Idk. But I'm glad it works for you.
I can't speak to Nobara, but Arch with KDE would be my vote if tweaking, documentation, and freshness (with potential instability) are the priorities.
Arch wins with respect to documentation; hands down, it's the best documented Linux distro in existence. KDE provides a ton of customization via GUI, and gaming is easily obtainable and quite good on any distro, largely due to Flatpak.
Where you might run afoul is the command line. I couldn't imagine running Arch without regular terminal use, but I'm sure you could get by for most tasks once KDE is up and running.
That's along the lines I was thinking, too! Using terminal regularly on Arch isn't a deal breaker for me, I'd like to hone my Linux-fu anyways :-) Definitely a leading option for me, and I'll probably be trying it out to see if I'm smarter at Terminal than I think I am.
It's not quite what you've asked for here, but as a Dev I'd be remiss if I didn't shill for Gentoo.
It ticks your rolling release box, has fantastic docs, a huge package repository (and the community repo Guru), and by design enables almost infinite configurability and customisation. We also have a binary package repository now for popular architectures, so you can choose to avoid compiling if you don't want to deviate from sane defaults (or only compile in cases where you do!)
On the hardware side, we have fantastic support for a number of architectures, I recently brought up a SPARC system and have some arch64 and riscv in the past.
Finally, even if you just decide to check the distro out, the process of installing, configuring, and maintaining a Linux system is outlined in detail within our handbook, and can provide a peek behind the scenes at what some other distros abstract; it's a fantastic learning experience for those interested.
Finally, we have fantastic support through volunteers in official IRC channels and forums, as well as unofficial hubs like discord.
Hopefully I've planted a seed and you'll check it out down the line. :)
Tweakable
Linux Mint scores less favorably on this due the absence of GNOME, KDE or a Window Manager within their offering (though you should be able to install them). Therefore, consider a distro that comes with (in alphabetical order):
- GNOME, if you want customization through extensions
- KDE, if you want built-in customization
- A Window Manager (too many to name), if you feel particularly brave
GUI-friendly
GNOME and KDE score excellent in this regard. Special mention goes out to openSUSE Tumbleweed and Garuda Linux for scoring better on this than most other distros.
Well-documented
The gold standard has been set by Arch and Gentoo. Gentoo is probably too hard for you currently. Arch could work out, but that requires you to do an excellent job at reading through its documentation and acting upon it.
Reasonable gaming compatibility
There shouldn't be a lot of difference between different distros in this regard. However, distros optimized for gaming (like Bazzite, Garuda and Nobara) do tend to score better as they've received patches and whatnot to solve edge cases.
Thoughts?
To conclude, I think you should play around with both GNOME and KDE. After that, consider one of the following distros:
- Arch; this one will undoubtedly teach you the most on Linux. However, you might perceive it as exhausting to keep up with coming from Linux Mint; FYI it's the most hands-on experience, though your mileage may vary*.
- Bazzite; likely to be the most hands-free experience out of these. Documentation does leave some to be desired.
- EndeavourOS; Arch with easier install.
- Garuda Linux; Opinionated Arch. Though, I'd say its defaults are relatively sane
even if I loathe its themes. - openSUSE Tumbleweed; Mostly included for YaST; i.e. its excellent suite of GUI apps that are simply absent on non-SuSE systems. Though, being the gold standard for a stable rolling release distro doesn't hurt either. Documentation is lackluster.
(FWIW, you could also try some spin of Fedora)
My 2 cents.
Been using arch for a few weeks now, so far it hasn't been too complicated. Also, using
archinstallmade the installation reasonably easyGNOME is NOT GUI friendly. They limit the things you can do through the GUI a lot.
If you want a "normal persons desktop" then it works.
The problem is, random things are missing and fixing them requires tons of work
- changing the mouse cursor
- adding right click "create new" entries (afaik)
- custom application launchers
GNOME just works if everything is perfect. For example apps, if you want to edit a .desktop entry of an app you need to go straight to the text files.
They just present you with "app icons" and you can only display the app in Software. Which is very fine but not friendly to people that need a little more.
Or when entering a manual path in Nautilus, you need a keyboard shortcut. Or when doing more advanced settings.
I agree that GNOME is not perfect. Never implied as such anyway. You've excellently noted some things that are easier to achieve on KDE than on GNOME. However, likewise, GNOME's extensions allow for customization beyond what KDE allows (see e.g. https://material-shell.com/).
If you're looking for commercial games on Linux, Steam has pretty much solved this with the "Steam Play" compatibility feature, which uses a customized version of WINE to run Windows games. For example, Baldur's Gate 3 runs perfectly. It should work anywhere Steam does.
Baldur’s Gate 3 runs perfectly
Yeah, but jesus fucking christ I'm in pain right now trying to run some mods because of dotnet8.
Most of my library is on Steam, so I'm not too worried about whether my games will run. It mostly means I'm more interested in rolling distros like Arch for their latest support, I guess. :-)
Bazzite. Low friction, all the goodness.
Sounds like you should just use Mint, especially if you tried and like it. It's customizable, GUI friendly, it's based on Ubuntu so most guides for either will work, and you can download Steam to it and play native games (or Windows games through Proton).
I don't know what you're looking for, that Mint doesn't provide. You can download different DEs or window managers, you can write your own bash scripts, and the core functionality for regular use is already there.
The only two draws that are really pulling me away from Mint are my taste for a rolling release model and my preference to learn the terminal if it's there. I'm no power user just yet, but I'm determined to learn to use the tools available to me in the Terminal for if/when my GUI tool inevitably breaks. Having a fallback is always nice.. but dual booting into EndeavourOS or Manjaro is a good motivator to get acquainted with the terminal, and quick, which is a level of effort I'm not at all opposed to and for knowledge I see as very helpful; knowledge I feel I'd take much longer to get in a distro that's well-cloaked in GUI like Mint. Taking this advice in stride, though; I'll certainly be hanging onto the foothold I have in Mint until I get confident with Arch-based and can personally assess my options with my own experience in both, whenever that (hopefully!) happens. :-)
I like the idea of rolling release in theory, but stability is extremely important to me because I use Linux as my daily driver.
EndeavourOS and Manjaro aren't really going to do much to address your desire to use terminal more than Mint IMO, either; most mainstream distros like that emphasize usability first and foremost.
If you're looking to really get under the hood, go with Arch ans follow a guide so you don't bork anything too badly. Arch uses a different package manager than Mint/Ubuntu, so some of the commands might look different if you're not following Arch-specific guides, but terminal is terminal is terminal in many cases. You can run Steam on Arch, and building the core functionality on your own will get you acquainted with terminal.
Although I've used everything from Arch to Zorin, and eventually you will have to use terminal for something. Just depends on what your longterm goals are, what usability you will need to rely on quickly, and how you think you'll get to those goals most efficiently.
Sounds like you should just use Mint, especially if you tried and like it. It's customizable, GUI friendly, it's based on Ubuntu so most guides for either will work, and you can download Steam to it and play native games (or Windows games through Proton).
I don't know what you're looking for, that Mint doesn't provide. You can download different DEs or window managers, you can write your own bash scripts, and the core functionality for regular use is already there.
I am very happy with fedora KDE, although I have weird flickering issues since fedora40/plasma 6 and so i temporarily switched to cinnamon (which was really easy) untiljthe nvidia 555 driver releases. I can really recommend this combination
DO. NOT. HOP. AROUND. DISTROS.
Stick to Mint. Play with Ubuntu as live ISO or in a VM. Take a few years, and go to Debian.
Arch is a different universe than the Debian/Apt family, so take your time until you really feel like nerding out on Linux, or fall into this hobbyist rabbit hole.
Use the most common, user friendly distros, so that getting support and getting the job done is easy.
I was kinda like you I guess. I was on Ubuntu for many months, probably a year or something and then wanted something new and refreshing, chose Arch and I love it. But this is very very personal so give everything a try if you want but all the distros work perfectly fine so if you're happy with your decision then just stick with it.
Permanently Deleted
Update 2: After trying out EOS, Arch, Manjaro, OpenSUSE Tumbleweed and Universal Blue, among many other options, I’ve come to the decision that I’m okay with sticking to Mint for now on my main desktop and setting up UBlue Aurora on my work laptop, but might consider switching to Kubuntu or Fedora if I want something similar at work and at home (one of my main draws away from Mint was that it didn’t offer a KDE option), or to OpenSUSE Tumbleweed if I must have a rolling distro for some reason. Thank you all for your guidance, and happy distro hopping!
Thank you for the update!
Could you elaborate upon your decision-making?
Hey, sorry for not seeing this! I decided to try UBlue Aurora because I love KDE and wanted to try something with it for work. I didn't get Bazzite for obvious reasons (no intention to game), but I picked something else in the same family because I was considering trying Bazzite for my main computer at the time. However, I don't think I'll be trying to fix what's not broken - Mint (Cinnamon) has been growing on me quite a lot since I posted this!
If there were a KDE implementation of Linux Mint available, I would probably jump on it for all my machines (finally, an excuse to use Warpinator!) but I know there's no officially endorsed one right now, and am not aware of any analogous distros... unless you count Kubuntu, I guess, but then I'd be missing a lot of those Mint features I've grown to love! Cheers to anyone else who's hopped from Mint because of this thread, though. :)