3 ms·

Mint ranks in the top 5 for the past 12 months on DistroWatch.com, even above Ubuntu. If Mint isn't mainstream, what is? Probably just Ubuntu, and maybe PopOS?

monocasa 5y ago
The distrowatch ranking is heavily gamed to the point of being useless. That's why MX Linux is the top now. Top distros actually being used are Ubuntu, Fedora, and Suse on the desktop, Debian and CentOS (or RHEL if you pay for it) on the server.
- benbristow 5y ago
  If we're talking 'average user could probably get on with this' then the only one there you mentioned really is Ubuntu. Fedora is close but in the end is really just a staging platform for RHEL. If you want to use any proprietary software /drivers you're likely going to need to enable RPMFusion etc. OpenSUSE I haven't used in a long time so can't really make a comment but I know it's well established in the Linux space. Debian is really more suited to the server environment & CentOS/RHEL actually are server distros. If the average user tried to install Debian if they managed to install it they'd likely end up with a system with lots of 'stable' (synonym: outdated) software & struggle to get anything proprietary installed (or OSS - does it even have a software store by default now?)
  - monocasa 5y ago
    > If we're talking 'average user could probably get on with this' We were talking about two things. What you just outlined, _and_ since you listed distrowatch's ranking I pulled out metrics from a job supporting a very, very large number of Linux systems. And I'd argue that if you're looking for a consistent, modern, GUI based experience, then that correlates with the distros with an actually decently sized userbase with large corporate installations. They're the ones that are supporting Linux with people who wouldn't try to run Linux on a dead badger. > then the only one there you mentioned really is Ubuntu. > Fedora is close but in the end is really just a staging platform for RHEL. If you want to use any proprietary software /drivers you're likely going to need to enable RPMFusion etc. What users end up doing instead of installing RPMFusion or somesuch is just downloading .rpms and installing them. If that's out of bounds for an average user than so is Windows with essentially the same model of downloading an exe or msi. > OpenSUSE I haven't used in a long time so can't really make a comment but I know it's well established in the Linux space. It's big in the European scene, particularly corporate and .gov envs. There's a language barrier at play hence why it doesn't make as much noise. There are millions of people using it as their daily driver though. > Debian is really more suited to the server environment & CentOS/RHEL actually are server distros. If the average user tried to install Debian if they managed to install it they'd likely end up with a system with lots of 'stable' (synonym: outdated) software & struggle to get anything proprietary installed (or OSS - does it even have a software store by default now?) I literally said "Debian and CentOS (or RHEL if you pay for it) on the server". I was digging into internal metrics so that you could have a better idea of what distros are actually being used by my than 1k people, and which ones have nothing better to do than botnet distrowatch.
  - marcodiego 5y ago
    The world has changed, move on! You're completely ignoring snaps, flatpaks and appimages. Ok, you can't install drivers with these, but if you have to install proprietary drivers, you're likely talking about an edge case where it is reasonable to expect that the user can add ppa, install from .deb or .rpm or compile from source. You make it seem more complicated than it really is.

monocasa 5y ago

The distrowatch ranking is heavily gamed to the point of being useless. That's why MX Linux is the top now. Top distros actually being used are Ubuntu, Fedora, and Suse on the desktop, Debian and CentOS (or RHEL if you pay for it) on the server.

benbristow 5y ago
If we're talking 'average user could probably get on with this' then the only one there you mentioned really is Ubuntu. Fedora is close but in the end is really just a staging platform for RHEL. If you want to use any proprietary software /drivers you're likely going to need to enable RPMFusion etc. OpenSUSE I haven't used in a long time so can't really make a comment but I know it's well established in the Linux space. Debian is really more suited to the server environment & CentOS/RHEL actually are server distros. If the average user tried to install Debian if they managed to install it they'd likely end up with a system with lots of 'stable' (synonym: outdated) software & struggle to get anything proprietary installed (or OSS - does it even have a software store by default now?)
- monocasa 5y ago
  > If we're talking 'average user could probably get on with this' We were talking about two things. What you just outlined, _and_ since you listed distrowatch's ranking I pulled out metrics from a job supporting a very, very large number of Linux systems. And I'd argue that if you're looking for a consistent, modern, GUI based experience, then that correlates with the distros with an actually decently sized userbase with large corporate installations. They're the ones that are supporting Linux with people who wouldn't try to run Linux on a dead badger. > then the only one there you mentioned really is Ubuntu. > Fedora is close but in the end is really just a staging platform for RHEL. If you want to use any proprietary software /drivers you're likely going to need to enable RPMFusion etc. What users end up doing instead of installing RPMFusion or somesuch is just downloading .rpms and installing them. If that's out of bounds for an average user than so is Windows with essentially the same model of downloading an exe or msi. > OpenSUSE I haven't used in a long time so can't really make a comment but I know it's well established in the Linux space. It's big in the European scene, particularly corporate and .gov envs. There's a language barrier at play hence why it doesn't make as much noise. There are millions of people using it as their daily driver though. > Debian is really more suited to the server environment & CentOS/RHEL actually are server distros. If the average user tried to install Debian if they managed to install it they'd likely end up with a system with lots of 'stable' (synonym: outdated) software & struggle to get anything proprietary installed (or OSS - does it even have a software store by default now?) I literally said "Debian and CentOS (or RHEL if you pay for it) on the server". I was digging into internal metrics so that you could have a better idea of what distros are actually being used by my than 1k people, and which ones have nothing better to do than botnet distrowatch.
- marcodiego 5y ago
  The world has changed, move on! You're completely ignoring snaps, flatpaks and appimages. Ok, you can't install drivers with these, but if you have to install proprietary drivers, you're likely talking about an edge case where it is reasonable to expect that the user can add ppa, install from .deb or .rpm or compile from source. You make it seem more complicated than it really is.