3
votes
Linux Mint desktop environment recommendations?
I am planning on switching to Linux Mint as my first Linux daily driver. I know someone who's used Cinnamon (the default) and it works fine, but I was wondering if the other options officially provided (Xfce and MATE) are any better? I have a little bit of (pretty trivial) GNOME experience on Ubuntu, but I don't really understand the pros and cons of different DEs. I've used KDE on the Steam Deck, and I hear that's a popular one, but can I get that on Mint?
You can install KDE in Mint fairly easily or you could just skip all that and do Kubuntu instead of Mint.
I was interested in Mint since that's what I've had by far the most people recommend. Does Kubuntu have the problem with pushing snaps like Ubuntu?
Yes, Kubuntu has snaps by default just like Ubuntu. I'm actually planning for my next upgrade / OS move to be going from Kubuntu -> Mint. I've used Mint recently on a laptop and have decided I like it more than Kubuntu which has been my daily driver on my gaming PC for years now.
I'm actually using Cinnamon (the default DE on Mint) on Kubuntu right now because KDE's compositing had some weird issues that I could never solve after days and many hours of trying, and just in general I kinda started disliking a number of things about it. It's kind of a frankenstein of a system at this point and I don't think a Kubuntu OS upgrade would go too smoothly, so I think I'm going to jump to Mint.
You can disable snaps in Kubuntu and all of that, but I just want to stop at least directly supporting Canonical's choices and move to something they don't have control over.
Its just Ubuntu with KDE, so yes it has snaps.
I don't like snaps either but I do think the snap hate is a little overblown. If thats your concern then run whichever Mint DE you choose or put KDE on after the fact. I kind of feel like half of what a DE is, is just cosmetic and the other half of what it is, is the bundled apps.
I'm currently thinking of migrating relative's PC away from Ubuntu. While it can be stable and ok for standard desktop use, this relative plays games and Ubuntu is slow at upgrading packages (protontricks in this case) so we will beprobably going Arch.
Just wanted you to know you would have a bit older packages if you go Ubuntu route.
I do plan on using Steam, so I have definitely thought about the stability of Mint being Ubuntu based vs latest updates for games on Arch. I think about how SteamOS is Arch based, and Valve is now investing in Arch. I've been looking into Endeavour, and I've heard a lot of people say they like it. Would that be a reasonable OS to use for someone with small-but-nonzero Linux experience?
I'm not really that much knowledgeable about Linux. I do use it for 15+ years as my only OS and I run Gentoo foro around 13 of those years, which can kinda make me Linux guru (as Gentoo is a bit heavy on experience and knowledge if you want to set it up and take careof he system), but I don't feel like one.
I have used OpenSUSE, just a tiny bit of Fedora and I manage one Ubuntu machine in the family (actually two, the second ine being the gaming PC that I will migrate to Arch). Just so you know about my experience.
Today I wouldn't use stable distribution like Ubuntu XX.04 (LTS) or its variants for gaming. It's simply too conservative for this kind of usage. It is perfect for standard PC use (movies, music, photos, web browsing/FB/etc.) but not for gaming due to not being on or close to the edge.
I would pick Arch for afew reasons. Some of them are:
My reasoning has nothing to do with Steam or Valve although I use it on Gentoo and I'm a fan of Valve. I also have Steam Deck and it is the sole reason why I'm picking KDE for the desktop gameing machine that will use Arch. Personally, I use MATE, which is... old school, let's say. But I want the Average Joe using the gaming PC to be able to comfortably switch audio outputs, manage wallpaper, screen locking and other stuff, which MATE can do but not in the (subjectively easy) ways other desktop environments do.
If you want to get more knowledge about Linux, you can definitely go Arch. It is hard to setup though, as you install it from command line. You boot Live USB, connect to internet (wired or wifi) and then go through install process. You may and probably also will fail somewhere along the way, but apart from losing time, you are good. You learn by doing mistakes and reading and applying what you learned. Arch will make you learn a lot during the installation and you will use this knowledge while you manage your OS in the future.
If you don't feel going for it, stick to some other distro for some time and learn a bit more using it. You can go Arch (or other distro) anytime. If I had to leave Arch (and Gentoo) out of a queation, I would probably try Fedora. No real reason to go along with my pick though. I would just try it and mybe it would stick.
I’ve had a mostly decent experience with (Ubuntu’s package of) GNOME on Mint last time I tried it, but I had occasional none of the peripherals work on wake up if you’re using a laptop.
I've not really enjoyed KDE on Arch over the last patch and wouldn't recommend it. Almost every custom theme constantly broke or caused hang ups. Window priority layering seems random. Widgets are inconsistent and can be pretty unintuitive. The mobile tool worked once. And it doesn't play nice with my notification scripts. People say the latest patch is much better but I haven't tested it yet.
I tried the new Deepin DE for a test VM and its pleasant to look at. Lots of little tools and QoL features wrapped up in clean animations and designs. Pretty close to a Mac style of seamlessness but with its own flavour. It's not perfect though, lot of people (myself included) don't exactly trust the CCP ties. It can also feel very casual-user focused and there was a few major bugs. Prime example is that some password dialog boxes are called but don't fully render. Sometimes you might see a drop shadow outline or accidentally click a button on it, but if you don't, you'll never know what's going on.
And speaking for another new user, my wife is trying PopOS with Cosmic GNOME and she's enjoying it. Only complaints is that it sometimes bogs down her old laptop. I think there is a version of Cosmic being made from scratch that will be better optimized and have nvidia compatibility out the box so it's worth keeping an eye on.
Personally, I'm on a minimalist kick and currently Frankensteining Hyperland to have task specific workspaces. It's not an environment I'd recommend to anyone, especially new users, simply because its a major departure from the normal PC experience and needs a ton of added work. MATE works well as my stable environment with how bare bones it is.
At the end of the day, most DEs and Distros are just a matter of fetures and compromise. My recommendation would be to start with the stable, basic and supported Cinnamon environment, then use that as a springboard to explore others and a safe space to come back to when things go wrong. There's nothing wrong with having a few installed and jumping between them.
On that note, don't get too attached to your build until a few months in. I've worked with a few linux based severs and used Qubes for a while, but fully jumping from Windows this year was fun, but pretty humbling. Just had to do my 4th arch reinstall last week and almost mixed the 250 GB system partition with the 2.5TB data partition. But every time you reinstalls or distro/kernal hop, you'll learn a lot and might want to get a clean start. And there can be quite a few risks in a Linux environment if you are unfamiliar.
Definitely go with one of the officially supported DEs. Cinnamon feels more modern than Xfce and MATE, so try that first.
I like Cinnamon on Mint. It's slick, is getting Wayland support, and has a GNOME-style plugin system on top of a fully-functional desktop.