9 ms·

Try Linux

81 points by freddyym 6y ago

lmilcin 6y ago
Once you get bored with a regular distribution you can go and try Linux from Scratch. Me, personally, this was the tool that really introduced me to Linux OS. Understanding how everything is put together and how it bootstraps will make you a better user of whatever distro you choose in the end. (No, don't use LFS on your workstation.)
- rajman187 6y ago
  Indeed. I never wandered that far into the deep end but did spend years running Gentoo as my main (initially, then sole) OS of choice. It took a few tries, emerge --update --newuse --deep --quiet @world was very slow on the Pentium III, but once it was up and running I loved every aspect of using it with openbox WM and others like it, sharing with folks on deviantart, etc. I don't think I'll go back to that at any point, as it was far too much effort, but in terms of what I learned it was invaluable. I should caveat that I would like to do the same with a BSD system at some point, only for fun on a separate machine.
- m463 6y ago
  I enjoy arch for the same reasons, but I am not familiar with Linux from Scratch. you say not to use it on your workstation -- is it more of an tutorial than a distro?
  - Nextgrid 6y ago
    LFS wouldn't have a package manager (as far as I know) so it would be an insane amount of effort to keep all the software up to date (by recompiling everything manually). Arch is actually a nice middle-ground. It's got a lot of learning potential (you still build the system from scratch by installing everything manually and creating the right files and mount points - there is no installer) but it's not as tedious as LFS and can actually be usable day to day (spend years on Arch before moving to proprietary OSes).
    - lmilcin 6y ago
      I would add that the last time I used LFS was almost 20 years ago. I don't know if the procedure got more complex. From what I skimmed it looks manageable (I guess that's the whole point). The reason for not using LFS would actually be security. It is possible to just install whatever you want and then use it for a long time (akin to LTS Ubuntu distribution). But you still need to somehow notice there are critical security updates and you definitely don't want to miss them. Another reason is that distro developers create a huge amount of convenient mechanisms and choices for the users. As an example, getting software X to work might not be a problem, but getting X to work along Y and Z when they might have conflicting dependencies might already be a headache. Distro developers will ensure various dependencies are tested and make sense together. If you install something on Gentoo (sorry, I don't have experience with Arch) and it doesn't work, there is a good chance it is possible to make it work and you can Google the solution. When you install something on LFS and it doesn't work you are pretty much on your own.
  - lmilcin 6y ago
    I would say it is somewhere between tutorial and distro. It is a distro that has no binaries for you to download. Instead you copy/paste pieces of code and follow instructions. Instructions are regularly updated like a real distro.
schmudde 6y ago
Well - all the options are part of the problem. I use Pop!_OS because it was the balance between getting things done and spending hours tinkering with my machine. It's not that I don't enjoy it. It's just a question of where I need to be spending my time.
- pantalaimon 6y ago
  Will you have the Ubuntu family of distros that will all work equally well. All those niece distributions are nice, but I wouldn’t recommend them to newcomers as it’s harder there to get support.
- anaphor 6y ago
  I've tried many different distros (Ubuntu, Arch, Fedora, OpenSUSE, etc) and I actually find it much harder to get things done with Ubuntu or Debian than I do Arch or other lightweight distros like Alpine. The reason is that I often have to (or want to) do things that aren't supported by Debian or Ubuntu because it either requires using very new versions of software or it requires modifying a bunch of system configuration files. When you try to do that on Debian/Ubuntu you'll quickly run into problems because you're doing something outside what they expect you to do. Everything is hidden behind a big layer of abstraction (like a maze of symlinks and custom patches, etc). So, you may find things like Pop! easier to get things done with because you're ok staying within the realm of what they support, but once you try to do something outside that, I guarantee you will quickly get very frustrated.
  - DarkWiiPlayer 6y ago
    That's usually a slow transition though. I started out using linux mint a few years ago and since then I've gotten annoyed more than once at the way things are structured. What I've ended up with a "One box, two systems" aproach, where I do most stuff "the ubuntu way", but compile certain software from source and install it however I want it. The separation of `/usr` and `/usr/local` that's already common on Linux makes this work very well.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
DominikD 6y ago
Kernel has been ready for prime time for ages now. It's the distros - fragmentation and quality - that's still the problem.
isoprophlex 6y ago
Interesting page but maybe overwhelming to newbies. How is a beginner going to select a distribution from that huge list? choosing 'beginner' distros still leaves you with a long list of options, and no other easy means of comparing between them. Let alone how to figure out which desktop environment to choose from...
- webreac 6y ago
  IMHO a beginner has very few choicie. He should choose ubuntu. Fedora is about as good as ubuntu for beginners, but it is more difficult to find other users to get help. A beginner may choose fedora if he is using redhat at work and could get some directions from IT staff. The variants of ubuntu introduce some confusion and do not give much benefit in return. The other distributions do not fit beginners (either lack of polish or lack of users or both).
  - DarkWiiPlayer 6y ago
    I think Mint is a better choice than ubuntu; out of the box it resembles windows, with a menu button in the lower left corner and a window list in the bottom.
makach 6y ago
jokingly Oooh...! I really want to... But Windows is getting so good! It is where I have my fluff and stuff. I use it serverside, is that ok? I also own a MacBook which I use frequently, does that count a little?
- nogabebop23 6y ago
  not sure if you're joking, but windows (IMO) did get better up until Win 7, then took a couple of misteps and a big backwards step with win 10 trying to tie all the loose concepts together into a single OS. It's really too bad we couldn't have some of the under-the-hood improvements with a stripped back WIn 7 style UI and just leave it at that...
  - makach 6y ago
    I completely agree with you. There are issues with Windows. But it is not terrible anymore. I use windows as my desktop, it is convenient and pleasant. It works with my games and plays well with my devices. I have been borderline crossing over to Linux Desktop for many years, but the user experience is not convincing me. It is not that I haven't tried Linux on the Desktop, but only through virtualization - there is always so much configuration I need to set up in order to get up to a comfortable level, and then something changes or breaks. I have a few headless Linux servers which is a joy to use and manage, but I do that from my Windows or MacOS computer usually. I love how Windows and MacOS is starting to become more and more similar, makes synchronization of content and experiences much easier.
sfifs 6y ago
After being Linux exclusive on my personal laptop(s) for over a decade, I just went back to Windows + WSL 2. With WSL 2, there's very little reason to use Linux desktop any more. The windows cleartype, touchpad driver and sleep work a lot better while giving you a regular Linux environment and you don't have to dual boot to get Office and creative software
- linuxftw 6y ago
  > After being Linux exclusive on my personal laptop(s) for over a decade You're an important part of the community that can help report bugs during installation, boot up, drivers, etc. Consider switching back to help grow the community.
  - voqv 6y ago
    It happens rarely, I must admit, but nothing tops the linux community feeling when a vendor marks your driver issue with "won't-fix"
    - DarkWiiPlayer 6y ago
      The windows equivalent would probably be declaring it a feature.
- squidofbits 6y ago
  Apart from the fact Linux has total customisability, a working search function, doesn't spy on its users, has programs to run Windows apps, isn't anti-consumer, and of course is free.
  - sfifs 6y ago
    Maybe you missed the part where I said I was Linux exclusive for a decade plus. For me the trade-offs aren't worth it anymore - I'm mainly interested in a Linux programming environment. I'm sure the trade-offs are different for others.
bauerd 6y ago
Don't understand why Debian would be listed as "Intermediate", while Ubuntu is listed as "Beginner". IMHO lots of problems just vanish once you switch from Ubuntu to Debian …
- barrkel 6y ago
  Except for the problem of out of date software... :)
  - kc0bfv 6y ago
    Maybe on Stable. Sometimes. Not so much on Testing.
    - AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y ago
      One is forced to wonder why they must choose between "stable" and "up to date" at an OS level.
      - em-bee 6y ago
        because it takes a while to be sure that things are really stable. server and desktop have different stability requirements. on a desktop i just need all user apps to work well. on a server i need things to be rock solid. the newer the less stable things get. the distros i am familiar with i would sort in this order: RHEL/centos > debian/ubuntu LTS > fedora/ubuntu > debian testing fedora and ubuntu are stable enough for a desktop or client, but i'd never put them on a server.
      - ohyeshedid 6y ago
        For the same reasons that production, staging, and dev environments are standard.
        AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y ago
        Outside of Linux Desktop, the operating system and applications are considered separate beasts, so you're able to have a stable OS and a mix of stable/up-to-date applications as you see fit. The package manager/distro model that Linux employs only ever seems to give you the choice of one or the other, because it doesn't have a clear differentiation between "OS" and "application".
ryuukk_ 6y ago
- choosing wich distro to use = pain - installing a distro = pain - making dualboot screen user friendly = pain - installing graphics drivers = pain - installing software = pain macOS is the best linux distro, and for some reasons it is not on the list, go figure out
secondo 6y ago
Unlike Windows and MacOS Linux gives you options I’d rather say Linux gives you choices. Choices that you have to make, rather than options with (sensible) defaults. This is a big reason for why I’ve been unable to switch from macos to Linux as a daily driver every time I’ve tried in the past ten years. Ironically, it’s simply too costly. Macos has been degrading over the past 6-7 years, but it’s still pretty good at standing out the way. I’m gladly proven wrong if you can point at a path I’ve missed.
- ChrisSD 6y ago
  I'm curious, if you install a desktop distro like Ubuntu then what choices do you have to make?
  - chopin 6y ago
    Using Ubuntu. I use Mint. I pretty much left everything as it defaulted to.
  - albertzeyer 6y ago
    Password. Username. Maybe also hostname.
- Koshkin 6y ago
  One of the “options“ is Ubuntu. Looks like a sensible “default” to me. Just works. Stays out of your way.
  - tikthot 6y ago
    The only "default" I considered insensible with the latest Ubuntu is that it still overwrites the default system boot loader. I was able to recover through the BIOS boot menu though I can see this how it can deterring new users from trying this.
    - Nextgrid 6y ago
      I'm not sure why they insist on installing GRUB when UEFI allows the firmware itself to act as a boot manager (remembering boot options and their order) and the kernel itself can be booted directly as an EFI application.
apercu 6y ago
So I tried the linux thing off and on for about 6 years. After sun os, unixware, solaris, HP/UX, irix, bsd/freebsd, macOS, windows 3.1, 95, 98, NT and so on. The issue is every time I buy hardware (primarily laptops) there was a lot of research in to the components and the quality. I kept finding myself going back to OSX. It was just easier to in many many ways. But now OSX is bloated nagware.
livatlantis 6y ago
Ah exactly what I was looking for — a quick summary of the specificities/main features of each distribution. Thank you! I'm considering running one of these in a VM to play with Linux again. The last time was elementary OS on a Chromebook and I really enjoyed that.
nogabebop23 6y ago
>> While it may seem overwhelming to see all your OS options on Linux, you may instead find it comforting This is probably less common on HN, but I already have so many technology decisions to make, I don't really want to continually experiment with my OS. I just want it to disappear into the background, not be the star (or even really a conscious thought) EDIT: huh, I added this comment when I saw no others, but it turns out my reaction isn't too uncommon, considering the audience here. Too clarify, there are lots of situations where the OS should be a real first class concern, I'm just not convinced we'll ever get much traction at the general user PC level.
- Krasnol 6y ago
  It's not only you. I wonder what the target group for this page is. Obviously not the main mass of people who use Windows today because if they'd be forced to chose, they'd probably take the first on the top left. If they won't be forced, they'd leave the page right away because it doesn't say why they SHOULD change. The rest of people probably knows already about linux and don't get any relevant information from this...
lazyjones 6y ago
Desktop Linux will stay in the hobbyist domain forever if so much effort is spent on polishing separate "options" i.e. Distributions, window managers etc. when fixing the tools used by most users would be more important. Are the differences between package managers and keeping them really so important that it's not possible to do everyone a favour and agree on using just the best one? Sure, it's nice to have "options" but as the decades fly by, people seem to use that mostly as an excuse for still not having a user-friendly desktop Linux.
- Nextgrid 6y ago
  The Linux world spread its resources thin across a lot of "options" (with the result that none of them get enough attention to bring them to a polished state) instead of doing one option but doing it well.
- ac29 6y ago
  > fixing the tools used by most users would be more important This supposes that said tools are broken, which doesnt match my experience at all. Sure, there are obscure bugs in all software, but major issues are rare. If by fixing, you mean "I want tool A to be more like tool B", that's just a matter of opinion, and I personally find the relative abundance of opinionated software on Linux to be a benefit, not a hindrance. > do everyone a favour and agree on using just the best one Trying to decide on the "one best tool" and dumping the rest and is like trying to pick the "one best programming language" and dumping the rest.
Ingon 6y ago
I think too many distributions is part of the problem. Especially starting out, you don’t really know/understand what the difference is between each other. You just want something that works for your case and skill level. I wouldn’t put all these options together, but rather focus on a few distributions that are easy to setup and work well. If we want ppl to move to linux, we should focus on them. Present them with a few options that work really well, with guides on how to start up coming from windows/mac and solving their problems. Just presenting a list of options doesn’t make the decision easier. Personally, I’m using Pop_OS! because its easy to setup, works well on laptops, gets out of your way, and its more or less Ubuntu underneath, so its much easier to find software and help for it. But the distribution that really converted me over was Manjaro
- Nextgrid 6y ago
  Too many distributions is also part of a bigger problem and why there will never be a "year of the Linux desktop". We are looking at insane amounts of developer & administrative resources being wasted by every doing mostly the same thing in a slightly different way. Imagine the progress that could be made if all of this workforce was actually united and was working on one (or a handful, think server/workstation/tablet editions) good distribution.
  - p1esk 6y ago
    Now that cuda support has been announced in WSL, it might well be the beginning of the year of the Linux desktop. Before the announcement I planned to have two separate machines: Linux workstation and Windows desktop. Now I’m seriously considering combining the two into a Windows/WSL workstation.
  - mariushn 6y ago
    Reminds me of an article from 2003, talking about wasted resources on too many similar apps: http://freshmeat.sourceforge.net/articles/too-much-free-software http://freshmeat.sourceforge.net/articles/too-much-free-soft...
  - jaredklewis 6y ago
smitty1e 6y ago
See your "advanced"; raise you http://linuxfromscratch.org/ http://linuxfromscratch.org/ Which isn't a great idea for any business scenario, much less, personal productivity context. However, if you want to level up in your Linux-fu, it cannot be recommend highly enough.
jamescun 6y ago
I've personally switched to using Ubuntu 20.04 on my desktop, and honestly the switch has been uninteresting - which is a good thing. Works perfectly as a software engineering environment. I know it has been controversial in the Linux community and among long-term Ubuntu users, but Snaps are what made my switch relatively painless. Everything I need on my daily driver (Firefox, VSCode, Slack, Spotify...) is just there waiting for me. Don't need to fuss around with a package manager, third-party repositories etc. I am not completely Linux however, I still maintain my MacBook Pro for on-the-go work and an iPad down-time/multimedia purposes.
TheGrassyKnoll 6y ago
Don't be thinking there's only 30 of em: https://distrowatch.com/
axegon_ 6y ago
openSUSE "intermediate"? Huh? I've been using openSUSE for the past ~5 years. Sure enough, the repos are not as rich as the popular distros but everything always works out of the box, including proprietary software(which can be a nightmare even on mainstream distros).
- cosarara 6y ago
  And YAST makes system administration easier than any other distro. I would certainly set it as beginner.
jamil7 6y ago
Has anyone had success doing mobile development on linux? Thanks to XCode it seems it's a no-go for a lot of mobile developers.
- chopin 6y ago
  I do this for Android. Works like a charm.
haunter 6y ago
I'd. Really. But every time there is a problem (and usually I have more problems than under Windows or MacOS) I have to search forums and obscure blogs for hours and tinkering in the terminal while praying to not break something else too. Maybe I'm just too "casual" for the Linux experience.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y ago
  It has been my experience as well, and what's worse is that the information is very often out of date, because entire "ways of doing things" go obsolete in Linux Desktop land every 2 or 3 years.
- ac29 6y ago
  It can be annoying to have to chase down help for Linux problems, but nothing is worse than trying to Google issues with Windows. Recently I spent a couple hours trying to figure out how to get Windows Firewall to log dropped packets, and never did get it to work. On Linux, its a single command to the firewall frontend I use, and documented clearly in the relatively concise documentation.
maallooc 6y ago
This website shows the exact reason I don't use Linux out of virtual machines. In terms of desktop, there are so much whatever from whoever and they are all broken horribly that it's not even a joke anymore. Unlike Windows and MacOS Linux gives you options. That is the exact reason why I don't use Linux in desktop.
bubblethink 6y ago
linux evangalism is counter productive. In each of these threads, all the mac/windows people will come out of the woodworks and talk about how if only linux did xyz better, they would switch. Unfortunately, it doesn't, so they can't. Nobody learns anything new. The cycle repeats even if xyz is solved later with some new xyz. And in my experience, you cannot "convert" people to linux except for people who really are a blank slate (young and old people fit in this bucket, but average people do not). They have too much baggage, and nobody wins. People need to discover their own things.
flyx86 6y ago
This whole page is basically insulting the intelligence of users. > It's about time you try Linux implying that while you did have heard of Linux, you misjudged it. > Unlike Windows and MacOS Linux gives you options This is factually wrong, anyone knows that both Windows and macOS give you a lot of options. > The major operating systems put their users in a box, while Linux allows you to choose an OS that fits your needs and skill level. implying that you can't run macOS or Windows by choice. No, obviously zombie Steve Jobs forced you to buy a Mac for a lot of money. > and "free" here refers not to the cost of the software but to its liberty—as no one entity owns the software it essentially belongs to everyone, without restriction This is factually wrong but okay, copyright law is a complicated thing and it wouldn't make much sense to discuss that here. > So, in part, making the switch to Linux is an ethical decision about the software you use on a daily basis, and the rights you and others have to the information and things you use. implying that if I choose to buy a software for money to support its developers because I think they're doing a good job, this is somehow unethical. Actually, there were no ethics discussed in the previous paragraph, so this is a conclusion without foundation. > Most open source operating systems are completely free both in price & licensing. There are typically no upfront fees, lengthy legal agreements, or restrictive copyright protections. Um, did they ever see the GNU GPL? > Free software is developed completely transparently which means the source code is out there in the open for anyone to look at. This means, if you wanted to, you can have a meaningful influence over the software development process. That is not generally true. If you look for example at SQlite, you'll find that while this is a piece of free software used by millions, they generally don't accept patches or any other kind of influence. > There are thousands of free software applications available to install without the need to browse the web. All this software undergoes scrutinous review before it reaches you, so you can find and use what you like with confidence. implying that either non-free software isn't reviewed or that somehow I should trust people I don't know that review free software, but not people I don't know that review non-free software. > With LibreOffice, you can also open and edit any Word, Powerpoint, or Excel files you may already have. Anyone who ever tried opening a non-trivial Excel sheet with LibreOffice would disagree on that. > On other platforms, the creative field is dominated by proprietary applications, but there are several capable free and open source alternatives. … which also run on Windows and macOS. --- There are a lot of good arguments you can make in favor for Linux. This page totally botches it.
otikik 6y ago
Of all the Linux distros out there, the one that calls to me the most is NixOS. Do people use NixOS as their main OS? Does it have a "default desktop flavour", like Ubuntu does? (the manual seems to suggest XFCE - https://nixos.org/nixos/manual/index.html#sec-xfce https://nixos.org/nixos/manual/index.html#sec-xfce)
- ghancock 6y ago
  I do. When I installed it the default configuration had no desktop enabled but had commented-out lines to enable KDE. I think it's best to think of it as not having a default or preferred one, and you are instead required to pick one. (I haven't tried everything, so I don't have firsthand knowledge that they all work equally smoothly.)
  - otikik 6y ago
    That's good to know, thanks for answering. > not having a default or preferred one, and you are instead required to pick one. If you don't mind my asking: how well did NixOS work for you, as a desktop environment, out of the box? Did you have to do annoying IT work when you installed it (screen resolution, wifi, sound, maintenance mode...)? How often do you need to fix issues like that?
    - ghancock 6y ago
      Nothing related to screen resolution. Wifi worked via the command-line tools mentioned in the manual, or the KDE interface. Similar for other things. I didn't stick with KDE--I switched to sway--so there were a number of things to deal with because of that, but that won't matter if you do use one. If you do encounter an issue it will be more work to deal with, because you both have to figure out the underlying issue and then figure out how to fit that into the Nix way of doing things. The biggest factor is handling downloaded pre-built binaries that assume various libraries will be in typical locations. Those generally require patchelf and then they work fine. I would only recommend NixOS for now for people who are willing to tinker a bit and learn how it works.
guidovranken 6y ago
What people don't seem to realize is that an increase of popularity of Linux will lead to a tragedy of the commons situation. Desktop Linux currently is mature enough to be usable for most everyday tasks, but has a small enough market share to generally not fall prey to adware, spyware, malware, telemetry, backdoors, EEE type strategies, closed source blobs creeping into the ecosystem and so forth. As its market share increases, the more viable a target it becomes for such things.
- tmikaeld 6y ago
  Desktop Linux in general seem to have a very large amount of probable vulnerabilities, but it also has a very large community of companies that sponsor work and rely on it for servers. Would be interesting to see how quickly an open back-door is fixed after it's discovered. Is the maintainer available? If not, can the package be replaced? Will it be vulnerable for months, years? So many uncertainties make me not want to rely on Desktop Linux for sensitive work.
  - em-bee 6y ago
    from my past experience, faster than on windows or mac. the application maintainers need not be available. the distribution maintainers can step in and apply fixes to the versions they distribute. if a 3rd party windows application has a security issue, good luck getting any fixes.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y ago
  > closed source blobs creeping into the ecosystem and so forth Modern Linux is heavily reliant on closed source firmware blobs already.
  - fsflover 6y ago
    Only if you have chosen the wrong hardware. See Purism.
    - ac29 6y ago
new_realist 6y ago
The problem is not enough people trying Linux. The problem is that it is not compelling for non-geeks or non-free software activists. Mainstream users don’t have problems that Linux solves. If anything, it adds problems.
new_realist 6y ago
I recommend trying OSes in this order: - iOS/iPadOS - Android - ChromeOS - MacOS - Windows Only if none of these work would I recommend trying a Linux distribution. Even then I’d try a more modern OS like Fuchsia or seL4 first, just for kicks.
CtrlShiftI 6y ago
Why is Debian intermediate and ubuntu beginner?
- em-bee 6y ago
  because ubuntu provides a more polished desktop experience. as does fedora. at least that was the case in the past. i using debian for decades on servers, but haven't used it on desktops for a while now.
simonblack 6y ago
Cars and computers: "You can have any color you like, so long as it's black." = "Too many distributions" But look outside. What do you see? One size and color of motor vehicle? Definitely not. There are multiple brands of cars, there are multiple brands of trucks. There are multiple body shapes, there are multiple different seating capacities, there are multiple colors, there are multiple 'add-on' options. Somehow we never say "There are too many different cars available". Why not? It's time we got over the denigration of Linux. It's time we got over putting Linux on a pedestal. Linux is Linux. Select what flavor you want. Windows is Windows. Some people prefer it. MacOS is MacOS. Some other people prefer that. Who cares what other people want and use? As long as YOU are happy with what car you drive, or what computer OS you drive, it's nobody's business but yours. And it's no business of yours what the next guy chooses.

81 points by freddyym 6y ago

Once you get bored with a regular distribution you can go and try Linux from Scratch. Me, personally, this was the tool that really introduced me to Linux OS. Understanding how everything is put together and how it bootstraps will make you a better user of whatever distro you choose in the end. (No, don't use LFS on your workstation.)

rajman187 6y ago
Indeed. I never wandered that far into the deep end but did spend years running Gentoo as my main (initially, then sole) OS of choice. It took a few tries, emerge --update --newuse --deep --quiet @world was very slow on the Pentium III, but once it was up and running I loved every aspect of using it with openbox WM and others like it, sharing with folks on deviantart, etc. I don't think I'll go back to that at any point, as it was far too much effort, but in terms of what I learned it was invaluable. I should caveat that I would like to do the same with a BSD system at some point, only for fun on a separate machine.
m463 6y ago
I enjoy arch for the same reasons, but I am not familiar with Linux from Scratch. you say not to use it on your workstation -- is it more of an tutorial than a distro?
- Nextgrid 6y ago
  LFS wouldn't have a package manager (as far as I know) so it would be an insane amount of effort to keep all the software up to date (by recompiling everything manually). Arch is actually a nice middle-ground. It's got a lot of learning potential (you still build the system from scratch by installing everything manually and creating the right files and mount points - there is no installer) but it's not as tedious as LFS and can actually be usable day to day (spend years on Arch before moving to proprietary OSes).
  - lmilcin 6y ago
    I would add that the last time I used LFS was almost 20 years ago. I don't know if the procedure got more complex. From what I skimmed it looks manageable (I guess that's the whole point). The reason for not using LFS would actually be security. It is possible to just install whatever you want and then use it for a long time (akin to LTS Ubuntu distribution). But you still need to somehow notice there are critical security updates and you definitely don't want to miss them. Another reason is that distro developers create a huge amount of convenient mechanisms and choices for the users. As an example, getting software X to work might not be a problem, but getting X to work along Y and Z when they might have conflicting dependencies might already be a headache. Distro developers will ensure various dependencies are tested and make sense together. If you install something on Gentoo (sorry, I don't have experience with Arch) and it doesn't work, there is a good chance it is possible to make it work and you can Google the solution. When you install something on LFS and it doesn't work you are pretty much on your own.
- lmilcin 6y ago
  I would say it is somewhere between tutorial and distro. It is a distro that has no binaries for you to download. Instead you copy/paste pieces of code and follow instructions. Instructions are regularly updated like a real distro.

schmudde 6y ago

Well - all the options are part of the problem. I use Pop!_OS because it was the balance between getting things done and spending hours tinkering with my machine. It's not that I don't enjoy it. It's just a question of where I need to be spending my time.

pantalaimon 6y ago
Will you have the Ubuntu family of distros that will all work equally well. All those niece distributions are nice, but I wouldn’t recommend them to newcomers as it’s harder there to get support.
anaphor 6y ago
I've tried many different distros (Ubuntu, Arch, Fedora, OpenSUSE, etc) and I actually find it much harder to get things done with Ubuntu or Debian than I do Arch or other lightweight distros like Alpine. The reason is that I often have to (or want to) do things that aren't supported by Debian or Ubuntu because it either requires using very new versions of software or it requires modifying a bunch of system configuration files. When you try to do that on Debian/Ubuntu you'll quickly run into problems because you're doing something outside what they expect you to do. Everything is hidden behind a big layer of abstraction (like a maze of symlinks and custom patches, etc). So, you may find things like Pop! easier to get things done with because you're ok staying within the realm of what they support, but once you try to do something outside that, I guarantee you will quickly get very frustrated.
- DarkWiiPlayer 6y ago
  That's usually a slow transition though. I started out using linux mint a few years ago and since then I've gotten annoyed more than once at the way things are structured. What I've ended up with a "One box, two systems" aproach, where I do most stuff "the ubuntu way", but compile certain software from source and install it however I want it. The separation of `/usr` and `/usr/local` that's already common on Linux makes this work very well.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

DominikD 6y ago

Kernel has been ready for prime time for ages now. It's the distros - fragmentation and quality - that's still the problem.

isoprophlex 6y ago

Interesting page but maybe overwhelming to newbies. How is a beginner going to select a distribution from that huge list? choosing 'beginner' distros still leaves you with a long list of options, and no other easy means of comparing between them. Let alone how to figure out which desktop environment to choose from...

webreac 6y ago
IMHO a beginner has very few choicie. He should choose ubuntu. Fedora is about as good as ubuntu for beginners, but it is more difficult to find other users to get help. A beginner may choose fedora if he is using redhat at work and could get some directions from IT staff. The variants of ubuntu introduce some confusion and do not give much benefit in return. The other distributions do not fit beginners (either lack of polish or lack of users or both).
- DarkWiiPlayer 6y ago
  I think Mint is a better choice than ubuntu; out of the box it resembles windows, with a menu button in the lower left corner and a window list in the bottom.

makach 6y ago

jokingly Oooh...! I really want to... But Windows is getting so good! It is where I have my fluff and stuff. I use it serverside, is that ok? I also own a MacBook which I use frequently, does that count a little?

nogabebop23 6y ago
not sure if you're joking, but windows (IMO) did get better up until Win 7, then took a couple of misteps and a big backwards step with win 10 trying to tie all the loose concepts together into a single OS. It's really too bad we couldn't have some of the under-the-hood improvements with a stripped back WIn 7 style UI and just leave it at that...
- makach 6y ago
  I completely agree with you. There are issues with Windows. But it is not terrible anymore. I use windows as my desktop, it is convenient and pleasant. It works with my games and plays well with my devices. I have been borderline crossing over to Linux Desktop for many years, but the user experience is not convincing me. It is not that I haven't tried Linux on the Desktop, but only through virtualization - there is always so much configuration I need to set up in order to get up to a comfortable level, and then something changes or breaks. I have a few headless Linux servers which is a joy to use and manage, but I do that from my Windows or MacOS computer usually. I love how Windows and MacOS is starting to become more and more similar, makes synchronization of content and experiences much easier.

sfifs 6y ago

After being Linux exclusive on my personal laptop(s) for over a decade, I just went back to Windows + WSL 2. With WSL 2, there's very little reason to use Linux desktop any more. The windows cleartype, touchpad driver and sleep work a lot better while giving you a regular Linux environment and you don't have to dual boot to get Office and creative software

linuxftw 6y ago
> After being Linux exclusive on my personal laptop(s) for over a decade You're an important part of the community that can help report bugs during installation, boot up, drivers, etc. Consider switching back to help grow the community.
- voqv 6y ago
  It happens rarely, I must admit, but nothing tops the linux community feeling when a vendor marks your driver issue with "won't-fix"
  - DarkWiiPlayer 6y ago
    The windows equivalent would probably be declaring it a feature.
squidofbits 6y ago
Apart from the fact Linux has total customisability, a working search function, doesn't spy on its users, has programs to run Windows apps, isn't anti-consumer, and of course is free.
- sfifs 6y ago
  Maybe you missed the part where I said I was Linux exclusive for a decade plus. For me the trade-offs aren't worth it anymore - I'm mainly interested in a Linux programming environment. I'm sure the trade-offs are different for others.

bauerd 6y ago

Don't understand why Debian would be listed as "Intermediate", while Ubuntu is listed as "Beginner". IMHO lots of problems just vanish once you switch from Ubuntu to Debian …

barrkel 6y ago
Except for the problem of out of date software... :)
- kc0bfv 6y ago
  Maybe on Stable. Sometimes. Not so much on Testing.
  - AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y ago
    One is forced to wonder why they must choose between "stable" and "up to date" at an OS level.
    - em-bee 6y ago
      because it takes a while to be sure that things are really stable. server and desktop have different stability requirements. on a desktop i just need all user apps to work well. on a server i need things to be rock solid. the newer the less stable things get. the distros i am familiar with i would sort in this order: RHEL/centos > debian/ubuntu LTS > fedora/ubuntu > debian testing fedora and ubuntu are stable enough for a desktop or client, but i'd never put them on a server.
    - ohyeshedid 6y ago
      For the same reasons that production, staging, and dev environments are standard.
      - AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y ago
        Outside of Linux Desktop, the operating system and applications are considered separate beasts, so you're able to have a stable OS and a mix of stable/up-to-date applications as you see fit. The package manager/distro model that Linux employs only ever seems to give you the choice of one or the other, because it doesn't have a clear differentiation between "OS" and "application".

ryuukk_ 6y ago

- choosing wich distro to use = pain - installing a distro = pain - making dualboot screen user friendly = pain - installing graphics drivers = pain - installing software = pain macOS is the best linux distro, and for some reasons it is not on the list, go figure out

secondo 6y ago

Unlike Windows and MacOS Linux gives you options I’d rather say Linux gives you choices. Choices that you have to make, rather than options with (sensible) defaults. This is a big reason for why I’ve been unable to switch from macos to Linux as a daily driver every time I’ve tried in the past ten years. Ironically, it’s simply too costly. Macos has been degrading over the past 6-7 years, but it’s still pretty good at standing out the way. I’m gladly proven wrong if you can point at a path I’ve missed.

ChrisSD 6y ago
I'm curious, if you install a desktop distro like Ubuntu then what choices do you have to make?
- chopin 6y ago
  Using Ubuntu. I use Mint. I pretty much left everything as it defaulted to.
- albertzeyer 6y ago
  Password. Username. Maybe also hostname.
Koshkin 6y ago
One of the “options“ is Ubuntu. Looks like a sensible “default” to me. Just works. Stays out of your way.
- tikthot 6y ago
  The only "default" I considered insensible with the latest Ubuntu is that it still overwrites the default system boot loader. I was able to recover through the BIOS boot menu though I can see this how it can deterring new users from trying this.
  - Nextgrid 6y ago
    I'm not sure why they insist on installing GRUB when UEFI allows the firmware itself to act as a boot manager (remembering boot options and their order) and the kernel itself can be booted directly as an EFI application.

apercu 6y ago

So I tried the linux thing off and on for about 6 years. After sun os, unixware, solaris, HP/UX, irix, bsd/freebsd, macOS, windows 3.1, 95, 98, NT and so on. The issue is every time I buy hardware (primarily laptops) there was a lot of research in to the components and the quality. I kept finding myself going back to OSX. It was just easier to in many many ways. But now OSX is bloated nagware.

livatlantis 6y ago

Ah exactly what I was looking for — a quick summary of the specificities/main features of each distribution. Thank you! I'm considering running one of these in a VM to play with Linux again. The last time was elementary OS on a Chromebook and I really enjoyed that.

nogabebop23 6y ago

>> While it may seem overwhelming to see all your OS options on Linux, you may instead find it comforting This is probably less common on HN, but I already have so many technology decisions to make, I don't really want to continually experiment with my OS. I just want it to disappear into the background, not be the star (or even really a conscious thought) EDIT: huh, I added this comment when I saw no others, but it turns out my reaction isn't too uncommon, considering the audience here. Too clarify, there are lots of situations where the OS should be a real first class concern, I'm just not convinced we'll ever get much traction at the general user PC level.

Krasnol 6y ago
It's not only you. I wonder what the target group for this page is. Obviously not the main mass of people who use Windows today because if they'd be forced to chose, they'd probably take the first on the top left. If they won't be forced, they'd leave the page right away because it doesn't say why they SHOULD change. The rest of people probably knows already about linux and don't get any relevant information from this...

lazyjones 6y ago

Desktop Linux will stay in the hobbyist domain forever if so much effort is spent on polishing separate "options" i.e. Distributions, window managers etc. when fixing the tools used by most users would be more important. Are the differences between package managers and keeping them really so important that it's not possible to do everyone a favour and agree on using just the best one? Sure, it's nice to have "options" but as the decades fly by, people seem to use that mostly as an excuse for still not having a user-friendly desktop Linux.

Nextgrid 6y ago
The Linux world spread its resources thin across a lot of "options" (with the result that none of them get enough attention to bring them to a polished state) instead of doing one option but doing it well.
ac29 6y ago
> fixing the tools used by most users would be more important This supposes that said tools are broken, which doesnt match my experience at all. Sure, there are obscure bugs in all software, but major issues are rare. If by fixing, you mean "I want tool A to be more like tool B", that's just a matter of opinion, and I personally find the relative abundance of opinionated software on Linux to be a benefit, not a hindrance. > do everyone a favour and agree on using just the best one Trying to decide on the "one best tool" and dumping the rest and is like trying to pick the "one best programming language" and dumping the rest.

Ingon 6y ago

I think too many distributions is part of the problem. Especially starting out, you don’t really know/understand what the difference is between each other. You just want something that works for your case and skill level. I wouldn’t put all these options together, but rather focus on a few distributions that are easy to setup and work well. If we want ppl to move to linux, we should focus on them. Present them with a few options that work really well, with guides on how to start up coming from windows/mac and solving their problems. Just presenting a list of options doesn’t make the decision easier. Personally, I’m using Pop_OS! because its easy to setup, works well on laptops, gets out of your way, and its more or less Ubuntu underneath, so its much easier to find software and help for it. But the distribution that really converted me over was Manjaro

Nextgrid 6y ago
Too many distributions is also part of a bigger problem and why there will never be a "year of the Linux desktop". We are looking at insane amounts of developer & administrative resources being wasted by every doing mostly the same thing in a slightly different way. Imagine the progress that could be made if all of this workforce was actually united and was working on one (or a handful, think server/workstation/tablet editions) good distribution.
- p1esk 6y ago
  Now that cuda support has been announced in WSL, it might well be the beginning of the year of the Linux desktop. Before the announcement I planned to have two separate machines: Linux workstation and Windows desktop. Now I’m seriously considering combining the two into a Windows/WSL workstation.
- mariushn 6y ago
  Reminds me of an article from 2003, talking about wasted resources on too many similar apps: http://freshmeat.sourceforge.net/articles/too-much-free-software http://freshmeat.sourceforge.net/articles/too-much-free-soft...
- jaredklewis 6y ago

smitty1e 6y ago

See your "advanced"; raise you http://linuxfromscratch.org/ http://linuxfromscratch.org/ Which isn't a great idea for any business scenario, much less, personal productivity context. However, if you want to level up in your Linux-fu, it cannot be recommend highly enough.

jamescun 6y ago

I've personally switched to using Ubuntu 20.04 on my desktop, and honestly the switch has been uninteresting - which is a good thing. Works perfectly as a software engineering environment. I know it has been controversial in the Linux community and among long-term Ubuntu users, but Snaps are what made my switch relatively painless. Everything I need on my daily driver (Firefox, VSCode, Slack, Spotify...) is just there waiting for me. Don't need to fuss around with a package manager, third-party repositories etc. I am not completely Linux however, I still maintain my MacBook Pro for on-the-go work and an iPad down-time/multimedia purposes.

TheGrassyKnoll 6y ago

Don't be thinking there's only 30 of em: https://distrowatch.com/

axegon_ 6y ago

openSUSE "intermediate"? Huh? I've been using openSUSE for the past ~5 years. Sure enough, the repos are not as rich as the popular distros but everything always works out of the box, including proprietary software(which can be a nightmare even on mainstream distros).

cosarara 6y ago
And YAST makes system administration easier than any other distro. I would certainly set it as beginner.

jamil7 6y ago

Has anyone had success doing mobile development on linux? Thanks to XCode it seems it's a no-go for a lot of mobile developers.

chopin 6y ago
I do this for Android. Works like a charm.

haunter 6y ago

I'd. Really. But every time there is a problem (and usually I have more problems than under Windows or MacOS) I have to search forums and obscure blogs for hours and tinkering in the terminal while praying to not break something else too. Maybe I'm just too "casual" for the Linux experience.

AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y ago
It has been my experience as well, and what's worse is that the information is very often out of date, because entire "ways of doing things" go obsolete in Linux Desktop land every 2 or 3 years.
ac29 6y ago
It can be annoying to have to chase down help for Linux problems, but nothing is worse than trying to Google issues with Windows. Recently I spent a couple hours trying to figure out how to get Windows Firewall to log dropped packets, and never did get it to work. On Linux, its a single command to the firewall frontend I use, and documented clearly in the relatively concise documentation.

maallooc 6y ago

This website shows the exact reason I don't use Linux out of virtual machines. In terms of desktop, there are so much whatever from whoever and they are all broken horribly that it's not even a joke anymore. Unlike Windows and MacOS Linux gives you options. That is the exact reason why I don't use Linux in desktop.

bubblethink 6y ago

linux evangalism is counter productive. In each of these threads, all the mac/windows people will come out of the woodworks and talk about how if only linux did xyz better, they would switch. Unfortunately, it doesn't, so they can't. Nobody learns anything new. The cycle repeats even if xyz is solved later with some new xyz. And in my experience, you cannot "convert" people to linux except for people who really are a blank slate (young and old people fit in this bucket, but average people do not). They have too much baggage, and nobody wins. People need to discover their own things.

flyx86 6y ago

This whole page is basically insulting the intelligence of users. > It's about time you try Linux implying that while you did have heard of Linux, you misjudged it. > Unlike Windows and MacOS Linux gives you options This is factually wrong, anyone knows that both Windows and macOS give you a lot of options. > The major operating systems put their users in a box, while Linux allows you to choose an OS that fits your needs and skill level. implying that you can't run macOS or Windows by choice. No, obviously zombie Steve Jobs forced you to buy a Mac for a lot of money. > and "free" here refers not to the cost of the software but to its liberty—as no one entity owns the software it essentially belongs to everyone, without restriction This is factually wrong but okay, copyright law is a complicated thing and it wouldn't make much sense to discuss that here. > So, in part, making the switch to Linux is an ethical decision about the software you use on a daily basis, and the rights you and others have to the information and things you use. implying that if I choose to buy a software for money to support its developers because I think they're doing a good job, this is somehow unethical. Actually, there were no ethics discussed in the previous paragraph, so this is a conclusion without foundation. > Most open source operating systems are completely free both in price & licensing. There are typically no upfront fees, lengthy legal agreements, or restrictive copyright protections. Um, did they ever see the GNU GPL? > Free software is developed completely transparently which means the source code is out there in the open for anyone to look at. This means, if you wanted to, you can have a meaningful influence over the software development process. That is not generally true. If you look for example at SQlite, you'll find that while this is a piece of free software used by millions, they generally don't accept patches or any other kind of influence. > There are thousands of free software applications available to install without the need to browse the web. All this software undergoes scrutinous review before it reaches you, so you can find and use what you like with confidence. implying that either non-free software isn't reviewed or that somehow I should trust people I don't know that review free software, but not people I don't know that review non-free software. > With LibreOffice, you can also open and edit any Word, Powerpoint, or Excel files you may already have. Anyone who ever tried opening a non-trivial Excel sheet with LibreOffice would disagree on that. > On other platforms, the creative field is dominated by proprietary applications, but there are several capable free and open source alternatives. … which also run on Windows and macOS. --- There are a lot of good arguments you can make in favor for Linux. This page totally botches it.

otikik 6y ago

Of all the Linux distros out there, the one that calls to me the most is NixOS. Do people use NixOS as their main OS? Does it have a "default desktop flavour", like Ubuntu does? (the manual seems to suggest XFCE - https://nixos.org/nixos/manual/index.html#sec-xfce https://nixos.org/nixos/manual/index.html#sec-xfce)

ghancock 6y ago
I do. When I installed it the default configuration had no desktop enabled but had commented-out lines to enable KDE. I think it's best to think of it as not having a default or preferred one, and you are instead required to pick one. (I haven't tried everything, so I don't have firsthand knowledge that they all work equally smoothly.)
- otikik 6y ago
  That's good to know, thanks for answering. > not having a default or preferred one, and you are instead required to pick one. If you don't mind my asking: how well did NixOS work for you, as a desktop environment, out of the box? Did you have to do annoying IT work when you installed it (screen resolution, wifi, sound, maintenance mode...)? How often do you need to fix issues like that?
  - ghancock 6y ago
    Nothing related to screen resolution. Wifi worked via the command-line tools mentioned in the manual, or the KDE interface. Similar for other things. I didn't stick with KDE--I switched to sway--so there were a number of things to deal with because of that, but that won't matter if you do use one. If you do encounter an issue it will be more work to deal with, because you both have to figure out the underlying issue and then figure out how to fit that into the Nix way of doing things. The biggest factor is handling downloaded pre-built binaries that assume various libraries will be in typical locations. Those generally require patchelf and then they work fine. I would only recommend NixOS for now for people who are willing to tinker a bit and learn how it works.

guidovranken 6y ago

What people don't seem to realize is that an increase of popularity of Linux will lead to a tragedy of the commons situation. Desktop Linux currently is mature enough to be usable for most everyday tasks, but has a small enough market share to generally not fall prey to adware, spyware, malware, telemetry, backdoors, EEE type strategies, closed source blobs creeping into the ecosystem and so forth. As its market share increases, the more viable a target it becomes for such things.

tmikaeld 6y ago
Desktop Linux in general seem to have a very large amount of probable vulnerabilities, but it also has a very large community of companies that sponsor work and rely on it for servers. Would be interesting to see how quickly an open back-door is fixed after it's discovered. Is the maintainer available? If not, can the package be replaced? Will it be vulnerable for months, years? So many uncertainties make me not want to rely on Desktop Linux for sensitive work.
- em-bee 6y ago
  from my past experience, faster than on windows or mac. the application maintainers need not be available. the distribution maintainers can step in and apply fixes to the versions they distribute. if a 3rd party windows application has a security issue, good luck getting any fixes.
AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y ago
> closed source blobs creeping into the ecosystem and so forth Modern Linux is heavily reliant on closed source firmware blobs already.
- fsflover 6y ago
  Only if you have chosen the wrong hardware. See Purism.
  - ac29 6y ago

new_realist 6y ago

The problem is not enough people trying Linux. The problem is that it is not compelling for non-geeks or non-free software activists. Mainstream users don’t have problems that Linux solves. If anything, it adds problems.

new_realist 6y ago

I recommend trying OSes in this order: - iOS/iPadOS - Android - ChromeOS - MacOS - Windows Only if none of these work would I recommend trying a Linux distribution. Even then I’d try a more modern OS like Fuchsia or seL4 first, just for kicks.

CtrlShiftI 6y ago

Why is Debian intermediate and ubuntu beginner?

em-bee 6y ago
because ubuntu provides a more polished desktop experience. as does fedora. at least that was the case in the past. i using debian for decades on servers, but haven't used it on desktops for a while now.

simonblack 6y ago

Cars and computers: "You can have any color you like, so long as it's black." = "Too many distributions" But look outside. What do you see? One size and color of motor vehicle? Definitely not. There are multiple brands of cars, there are multiple brands of trucks. There are multiple body shapes, there are multiple different seating capacities, there are multiple colors, there are multiple 'add-on' options. Somehow we never say "There are too many different cars available". Why not? It's time we got over the denigration of Linux. It's time we got over putting Linux on a pedestal. Linux is Linux. Select what flavor you want. Windows is Windows. Some people prefer it. MacOS is MacOS. Some other people prefer that. Who cares what other people want and use? As long as YOU are happy with what car you drive, or what computer OS you drive, it's nobody's business but yours. And it's no business of yours what the next guy chooses.