6 ms·
Pop is my new favorite. I started using it at the urging of friends, and love it. I've written a couple reviews of it on my blog, as it's been my "daily driver"
by JeremyMorgan 5y ago
Pop is my new favorite. I started using it at the urging of friends, and love it. I've written a couple reviews of it on my blog, as it's been my "daily driver" for my laptop for nearly a year.
I've been a Linux user since 1995/96, and a die hard Arch user for about 10 years. So why would I want a Linux distro that's super hands-off and easy to use?
It's incredibly stable. "Set it and forget it". If I want a bleeding edge version of software I can add it. It's performant, easy, and all my hardware works. It really just "stays out of my way" so I can get work done instead of tinkering. It's nice.
I still keep an Arch install around, but when I want to fire up a laptop and get to work without a single problem, Pop has been fantastic for it. I recommend it to new users, as well as old neckbeards like me.
- 2Gkashmiri 5y agoive been wondering. if a new user is switching from windows, don't you think something like kde neon would have "less friction" UX wise ? i somewhat understand the appeal of pop os but gnome is wildly different from windows and i have seen people turn off.
- kitsunesoba 5y agoKDE is certainly closer to Windows than GNOME is, but in my opinion only enough that longtime Windows users would likely find it sitting an uncanny valley of Windows-ness, at least with all the default configurations (which most new users would be using) I've seen. In practice I've found that Cinnamon, XFCE, and MATE configured similarly to how they are by default on Linux Mint to operate more like Windows than KDE does.
- eitland 5y agoLong time KDE fan here. IIRC last time I tried Pop OS it seemed very usable and the only thing that stopped me from using it was some hardware issues on my rig (a faulty drive, not the fault of Pop OS). I especially liked that they try to clean up keyboard shortcuts in a smart way. (For reference my issues with Gnome 3 that they built (built?) on is the we-know-best attitude combined with what I perceive as agressive copying of certain Mac OS features and also not trusting its users.)
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- fleaaaa 5y agoFrom my experience, people who want to try linux is yearning for somewhat different UI, but not too different from familiar win/macos UI. Pop OS hits the sweet spot imo, refreshing but comfortable enough while usability is still there.
- azangru 5y agoNeon may be a bit too bleeding edge for a new convert from Windows. Kubuntu is probably just right.
- forgotpwd16 5y agoJust install dash-to-panel and desktop icons extension. Now you've a very fine traditional interface.
- misterpopo 5y agoYes https://imgshare.io/image/poposwindows.pgDfc7 https://imgshare.io/image/poposwindows.pgDfc7
- fosshogg 5y agoI keep seeing this advice for windows users switching to Linux - that they "need" a DE that is incredibly similar to Windows in order to feel comfortable. However, I think that's really the wrong approach. You'll just end up making them go into that headspace where they expect/want linux to work exactly like windows. If they really wanted something that's just like windows, why would they even leave windows to begin with?
- unixhero 5y agoReminds me of the first rule of Arch Linux. Always tell other people you use Arch Linux.
- JeremyMorgan 5y agoso if you're an Arch user, and a Vegan who does crossfit which one would you mention first?
- nix23 5y agoI use Arch (again) since 4 month...but just because of archinstall ;)
- riezebos 5y agoI tried that too yesterday! I wanted to try Gnome 41 so I used the gnome template in archinstall, but then afterwards I got in a big mess with NetworkManager vs. systemd-networkd and the docs said NetworkManager was included with the gnome group but then it wasn't and I wasn't sure what to disable/enable and couldn't install it until I set up wifi with systemd. Ended up installing Fedora 35 beta, so far I'm happy. The previous time I tried to install arch manually but I found out late in the process that I made a small mistake settings up something related to btrfs and luks and I didn't want to restart all over again. That part went great with archinstall.
- DarmokJalad1701 5y agoObligatory: https://github.com/overmighty/i-use-arch-btw https://github.com/overmighty/i-use-arch-btw
- forgotpwd16 5y agoAnd don't forget to get an email address from https://iusear.ch/iusearch-mailbox.html https://iusear.ch/iusearch-mailbox.html
- q-base 5y agoAny good reasons to select Pop over Ubuntu?
- Keyframe 5y agoNvidia out of the box.
- mcjiggerlog 5y agoUbuntu has had the proprietary nvidia driver on the iso and selected out of the box for a few releases now.
- sgtnasty 5y agoNVIDIA Optimus support - out of the box with a UI to switch graphics cards. The only other bistro I have seen to support it is Ubuntu MATE. All other distros require installation outside of the default package managers.
- NoThisIsMe 5y agoThere are other reasons but for one Pop doesn't push Snap. Flatpak is available and well integrated, but isn't forced down your throat (as Snap is in Ubuntu).
- rubyist5eva 5y agoI generally prefer flatpak but I feel snap is a bit ahead and for one simple reason: marketing. Canonical has been pushing very hard for snaps and it shows when I get get official builds of things like Zoom, Visual Studio Code, JetBrains and Spotify but the flatpak versions are just community provided. Some of them tend to work better than flatpak as well because of “classic” confinement. Using VS Code in flatpak and not having full access to the system in my integrated terminal kinda sucks. It might not be better from a security perspective but it’s much better from a user experience perspective and that matters more to me personally. The said I still use flatpak as well, and prefer to use flatpak if there isn’t a material difference in functionality between the snap and flatpak.
- zozbot234 5y agoNothing wrong with PopOS, but I'd pick plain Debian over Ubuntu. Just make sure to install from the "unofficial non-free media" if you're on modern hardware. Also the 'testing' channel of Debian makes for a great semi-rolling distribution.
- KronisLV 5y agoI think for many some of the appeal of Ubuntu is in Ubuntu LTS, which gets more attention than the Debian alternative. Have a look at the Ubuntu LTS page: https://ubuntu.com/download/desktop https://ubuntu.com/download/desktop And then look at the Debian equivalent: https://www.debian.org/lts/ https://www.debian.org/lts/ (though the differences are perhaps because the latter is comparatively more unofficial) But hey, many people prefer more stable distros with somewhat long life times, so that's a valid preference nonetheless. Disclaimer: mostly a Debian user, i dread having to migrate from 10 to 11, but hey, at least i can use Ansible for all of my servers this time around.
- cpuguy83 5y agoBetter marketing doesn't make it better. If you compare the actual releases I think you will find Debian to be more stable overall.
- thinkpadx1g4tw 5y agoI would prefer to use Debian if it was more stable. It worked fine on my workstation but if I try to use it on my laptop it would not ever resume from suspend making it unusable. I think Ubuntu has the benefit of the large user base making it more likely that your problem is solved. My laptop is also a 5 year old thinkpad x1 gen 4 so it should be supported, and Debian is the only linux that gave me this problem.
- ArclightMat 5y agoWhile unlikely, it could've been that the kernel version was too old or you were missing non-free drivers for something? On my experience, if it worked in Ubuntu, it would work on Debian, and if it didn't, using the latest backported kernel would solve it.
- forgotpwd16 5y ago>I've written a couple reviews Isn't it just Ubuntu with slightly (basically introduces tiling) different shell? What is there to review?
- jmrm 5y agoThere are some desktop and environment changes, but Pop also have a really good power management module that no other distro has, and good compatibility aroung different GPUs combination, and that is a big deal in laptops. I had some problem in the past with a laptop with Intel GPU + AMD GPU interchangeable graphics in other distros while with Pop is ready to use after installing. AFAIK, those who had Nvidia Optimus and similar Nvidia technologies had a lot more of troubles outside Pop. I haven't used Ubuntu in ages, so I don't know how those things are actually managed. Probably they aren't far behind.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- FunnyLookinHat 5y agoAnecdotal evidence, I know... But there were several things that just didn't work right for me on vanilla Ubuntu that Pop made right when I switched 3 years ago. Mostly graphics related in my case. I think it's important to remember that System 76 has been "making Linux work on hardware" for over a decade now, which is a totally different mindset to building a distro than most maintainers have.
- ChefboyOG 5y agoAlso, complete anecdata on my part, but I've found developers who've gotten used to working on Macs find Pop OS to be a smooth transition. At least, in my circle of friends/coworkers.
- blumomo 5y agoI second that. Running PopOS even on a System76 laptop which replicates the Macbook-macOS tandem experience.