4 ms·

As someone who used to be an avid linux desktop user, but has subsequently moved away from it and is interested in the current ecosystem with a view to maybe co

by Folcon 5y ago

As someone who used to be an avid linux desktop user, but has subsequently moved away from it and is interested in the current ecosystem with a view to maybe coming back, what would you say is a good entry point? I used to run Ubuntu back in the day if that helps. I'm curious to get a sense of how much has changed.

lolinder 5y ago
Ubuntu is very stable and easy to get started with. I know there's some frustration with Canonical's direction, but it's still very much the distro I'd recommend to anyone who's just getting started. Everything more or less works out of the box for me (as much as it ever did with Windows), and Ubuntu still has the advantage of being the primary focus of most online documentation.
nivenkos 5y ago
I'd recommend Arch Linux for developers. It takes a little bit of set-up / learning at the start. But you can easily try it out with a tool like ALMA - https://github.com/r-darwish/alma https://github.com/r-darwish/alma See my preset files here - https://github.com/jamesmcm/arch-i3-usb https://github.com/jamesmcm/arch-i3-usb But PopOS is probably the closest to the previous beginner Ubuntu experience now.
- cyber_kinetist 5y ago
  Also, if you don’t want the hardcore(!!!) installation experience of Arch Linux, try Manjaro Linux instead. It has one of the most sane defaults and the best GPU driver management system, and you can customize a lot of it since it’s just Arch under the hood.
- nvrspyx 5y ago
  As a counter-recommendation, I'd recommend openSUSE Tumbleweed for developers. It is also rolling-release, but packages are more heavily tested. It's easier to set up. And by default, it uses btrfs and provides a useful snapshot tool called snapper. While breaking has become relatively rare on Arch, it's simply easier to set up a stable environment without having to keep a close eye on updates with Tumbleweed.
- Iolaum 5y ago
  > I'd recommend Arch for Linux developers. fixed it for you ;)
- Folcon 5y ago
  Thanks for the presets, I'll have a glance through it.
guerrilla 5y ago
I've been using Arch Linux on Lenovo hardware (desktops and laptops) and have had no problems in years. I imagine the "easy" distros are even better with even more features. I wouldn't sweat it too much.
Iolaum 5y ago
Go with a mainstream distro to experiment and get a hang of it like Ubuntu, Fedora, PopOS, Mint etc. Main reason is that searching for sulutions in the web is much better for distros with a big user-base. Additionally understanding the trade-offs of different distros is very hard if you are not already in the ecosystem, hence just go with something to get your foot in the door and don't sweat it. Once you experience the papercuts and you get comfortable with them you can go into more advanced distros like Arch (derivatives e.g. Manjaro), Fedora Silverblue (what I currently use), etc. If you can get a friend to help you go with the installation process, that 'll be very useful. P.S. my TLDR suggestion would be to go with vanilla Fedora and use flatpaks for proprietary apps like steam/zoom/etc.
- Folcon 5y ago
  I didn't get on much with fedora when I last used it, it sounds like it's gotten better though.
FpUser 5y ago
I use Ubuntu and Linux Mint as my Linux Desktop. While I write enterprise backend server software for Linux ( C++ usually) I am far from being anywhere near "the Linux Expert". Most of my Linux development / debugging is done using Visual Studio (the real one) and Visual Studio Code right from the Windows Desktop. Still I do some work on Linux Desktop. For example I am using Linux Desktop and Lazarus / Freepascal Combo to develop Linux Desktop GUI applications. From my experience go with majors - Ubuntu and Mint. My reason for it is that those have most answers on Internet when doing search. Easiest to find packages for as well. Every time I tried something more exotic I was stopped by having to deal with the different package management and way more hassles to find up to date software packages I need or trying to build from sources. I am sure the "experts" could solve it but I have better things to do with my life and am not willing to learn some not really exciting stuff just for the kick of it.
t43562 5y ago
You have so much choice! That's where Linux scores. In my way of seeing it, there are 2 main classes of distribution at the moment: 1) Rolling update distros like Arch. 2) Distributions which offer "releases" some of which are long-term ones that don't change much except for security fixes e.g. Ubuntu. I love the rolling distributions like ARCH and its derivatives because I hate having to do the once-every-2-years "big upgrade" that you get if you want to have a modern linux. You pay for that with the potential for slightly more breakage from time to time (that is usually quickly fixed). This suits my personality perfectly but you might just want a safe drive and you'd choose one of the Ubuntu-derivates and download the Long Term Support release. You could be experimental within containers or virtual machines and benefit from having a more robust host. NB. I wouldn't waste time on Fedora - it's not too stable AND releases age quickly so I found it a pain to deal with.

by Folcon 5y ago

lolinder 5y ago

Ubuntu is very stable and easy to get started with. I know there's some frustration with Canonical's direction, but it's still very much the distro I'd recommend to anyone who's just getting started. Everything more or less works out of the box for me (as much as it ever did with Windows), and Ubuntu still has the advantage of being the primary focus of most online documentation.

nivenkos 5y ago

I'd recommend Arch Linux for developers. It takes a little bit of set-up / learning at the start. But you can easily try it out with a tool like ALMA - https://github.com/r-darwish/alma https://github.com/r-darwish/alma See my preset files here - https://github.com/jamesmcm/arch-i3-usb https://github.com/jamesmcm/arch-i3-usb But PopOS is probably the closest to the previous beginner Ubuntu experience now.

cyber_kinetist 5y ago
Also, if you don’t want the hardcore(!!!) installation experience of Arch Linux, try Manjaro Linux instead. It has one of the most sane defaults and the best GPU driver management system, and you can customize a lot of it since it’s just Arch under the hood.
nvrspyx 5y ago
As a counter-recommendation, I'd recommend openSUSE Tumbleweed for developers. It is also rolling-release, but packages are more heavily tested. It's easier to set up. And by default, it uses btrfs and provides a useful snapshot tool called snapper. While breaking has become relatively rare on Arch, it's simply easier to set up a stable environment without having to keep a close eye on updates with Tumbleweed.
Iolaum 5y ago
> I'd recommend Arch for Linux developers. fixed it for you ;)
Folcon 5y ago
Thanks for the presets, I'll have a glance through it.

guerrilla 5y ago

I've been using Arch Linux on Lenovo hardware (desktops and laptops) and have had no problems in years. I imagine the "easy" distros are even better with even more features. I wouldn't sweat it too much.

Iolaum 5y ago

Go with a mainstream distro to experiment and get a hang of it like Ubuntu, Fedora, PopOS, Mint etc. Main reason is that searching for sulutions in the web is much better for distros with a big user-base. Additionally understanding the trade-offs of different distros is very hard if you are not already in the ecosystem, hence just go with something to get your foot in the door and don't sweat it. Once you experience the papercuts and you get comfortable with them you can go into more advanced distros like Arch (derivatives e.g. Manjaro), Fedora Silverblue (what I currently use), etc. If you can get a friend to help you go with the installation process, that 'll be very useful. P.S. my TLDR suggestion would be to go with vanilla Fedora and use flatpaks for proprietary apps like steam/zoom/etc.

Folcon 5y ago
I didn't get on much with fedora when I last used it, it sounds like it's gotten better though.

FpUser 5y ago

I use Ubuntu and Linux Mint as my Linux Desktop. While I write enterprise backend server software for Linux ( C++ usually) I am far from being anywhere near "the Linux Expert". Most of my Linux development / debugging is done using Visual Studio (the real one) and Visual Studio Code right from the Windows Desktop. Still I do some work on Linux Desktop. For example I am using Linux Desktop and Lazarus / Freepascal Combo to develop Linux Desktop GUI applications. From my experience go with majors - Ubuntu and Mint. My reason for it is that those have most answers on Internet when doing search. Easiest to find packages for as well. Every time I tried something more exotic I was stopped by having to deal with the different package management and way more hassles to find up to date software packages I need or trying to build from sources. I am sure the "experts" could solve it but I have better things to do with my life and am not willing to learn some not really exciting stuff just for the kick of it.

t43562 5y ago

You have so much choice! That's where Linux scores. In my way of seeing it, there are 2 main classes of distribution at the moment: 1) Rolling update distros like Arch. 2) Distributions which offer "releases" some of which are long-term ones that don't change much except for security fixes e.g. Ubuntu. I love the rolling distributions like ARCH and its derivatives because I hate having to do the once-every-2-years "big upgrade" that you get if you want to have a modern linux. You pay for that with the potential for slightly more breakage from time to time (that is usually quickly fixed). This suits my personality perfectly but you might just want a safe drive and you'd choose one of the Ubuntu-derivates and download the Long Term Support release. You could be experimental within containers or virtual machines and benefit from having a more robust host. NB. I wouldn't waste time on Fedora - it's not too stable AND releases age quickly so I found it a pain to deal with.