The Ubuntu family is definitely a great "run and forget" style of OS. Very beginner friendly and stable and usually my first choice for server os. Within those I prefer Xubuntu for its stable and...
The Ubuntu family is definitely a great "run and forget" style of OS. Very beginner friendly and stable and usually my first choice for server os.
Within those I prefer Xubuntu for its stable and minimalistic Xfce desktop, but it comes just down to preference which is super nice to have.
Lately I tried out manjaro, which is a flavour of archlinux, but more accessible (simple ubuntu-like install, UI apps for package/kernel management) and it runs super fast and stable. Even switched to KDE for that, don't regret anything so far. Can recommend checking that out.
Is there a way to move from Ubuntu to Xubuntu that isn't a nightmare or where I won't end up losing my data? I love XCFE and use it at work. Unity is OK and I'm liking it more now that I figured...
Is there a way to move from Ubuntu to Xubuntu that isn't a nightmare or where I won't end up losing my data?
I love XCFE and use it at work. Unity is OK and I'm liking it more now that I figured out how to move the menu bar to the bottom of the screen instead of the left-hand side, but I don't know, XCFE still feels like home. My understanding is I'd need to move to XuBuntu to run XCFE - let me know if I've misunderstood please.
Arch Linux! I love it because of the simplicity. I know what I installed, I know where my configs are, and I know what all the processes running on my system are at any time (coughwindowscough)....
Arch Linux! I love it because of the simplicity. I know what I installed, I know where my configs are, and I know what all the processes running on my system are at any time (coughwindowscough). In terms of drivers and hardware (Nvidia GPU, bluetooth, printers, etc), it's been the easiest experience I've ever had, whereas these types of devices tend to have problems on Linux (at least in the past). This is all partially attributed to the fantastic Arch Linux wiki, which is incredibly helpful with Linux in general, not just Arch. The AUR also has just about every piece of software that I've ever needed, and when it didn't, pacman/makepkg makes it really easy to create a package using a PKGBUILD.
I agree with what what said, but In case you're unfamiliar with Arch, you should be warned that the installation process is trickier than other distros. There are guides online that will walk you...
I agree with what what said, but In case you're unfamiliar with Arch, you should be warned that the installation process is trickier than other distros. There are guides online that will walk you through it, but it requires doing a lot of things manually that the installers for other distros do for you. The trade-off is that you become really familiar with how your system is put together and what's on it.
After the installation is over though, I think it's one of the more simple distros to use, mostly thanks to the AUR and the Arch Wiki, like what mentioned.
I use arch too, btw. The thing I appreciated the most at first was the near total absence of patching. If I couldn't find arch specific docs, it didn't really matter. As long as the upstream has...
I use arch too, btw.
The thing I appreciated the most at first was the near total absence of patching. If I couldn't find arch specific docs, it didn't really matter. As long as the upstream has reasonable docs I am all set because the chances are arch didn't add or take anything away. That's huge.
Now I have gotten so used to that the thing that I love the most is PKGBUILDs. Be they supplied by the official arch devs, TUs, the AUR, or my own. I can repackage my own applications in minutes and have them installed just like anything else.
I use Ubuntu primarily because the community support is better than any other distro. Because it's used by a lot of newbies there's an abundance of threads answering every question you ever...
I use Ubuntu primarily because the community support is better than any other distro. Because it's used by a lot of newbies there's an abundance of threads answering every question you ever thought to ask.
I use Ubuntu for the same reason, though I'm thinking about switching to Debian because it separates its software into free and nonfree repos and I want to use as much free software as possible.
I use Ubuntu for the same reason, though I'm thinking about switching to Debian because it separates its software into free and nonfree repos and I want to use as much free software as possible.
Linux Mint. It's a better version of Ubuntu. Apparently they now have one which is directly Debian-based now as well. I used to use Arch Linux, but I don't have time for that right now.
Linux Mint. It's a better version of Ubuntu. Apparently they now have one which is directly Debian-based now as well.
I used to use Arch Linux, but I don't have time for that right now.
Kubuntu for me. I like how user friendly it is, and enjoy KDE more than any other DE. I see no reason to switch, although /g/ makes me want to try Debian
Kubuntu for me.
I like how user friendly it is, and enjoy KDE more than any other DE.
I see no reason to switch, although /g/ makes me want to try Debian
I run NixOS, I used to move between Ubuntu/Arch. But I found that NixOS was really interesting as a different way to build a system. I spent a lot of time figuring out configuration values, and...
I run NixOS, I used to move between Ubuntu/Arch. But I found that NixOS was really interesting as a different way to build a system. I spent a lot of time figuring out configuration values, and configuring services on servers. I found NixOS to be the easiest to setup a new comparable system within a minimal amount of time!
Debian/Ubuntu, because it runs on almost everything. I got tired really early on of everything being in a different spot/done differently in CentOS, and in NetBSD, and in Arch, and in Slack......
Debian/Ubuntu, because it runs on almost everything. I got tired really early on of everything being in a different spot/done differently in CentOS, and in NetBSD, and in Arch, and in Slack... settled on Debian since it runs on my old PC, my laptop, my headless servers, and my ARM SBCs.
I'm a chronic distro hopper. I was on Fedora last month, Ubuntu the month before that, Gentoo before. Now I'm on Arch, but I'm eyeing NixOS, it looks interesting. May install it next month, give...
I'm a chronic distro hopper. I was on Fedora last month, Ubuntu the month before that, Gentoo before. Now I'm on Arch, but I'm eyeing NixOS, it looks interesting. May install it next month, give it a go for a bit.
For a production environment, though? I'll take Debian 99% of the time.
I used normal ubuntu for a while, but was kind of done with unity after a bit, and gave ub-gnome a try for a while. Gnome is nice, but doesn't allow much changing around of stuff, so after using...
I used normal ubuntu for a while, but was kind of done with unity after a bit, and gave ub-gnome a try for a while. Gnome is nice, but doesn't allow much changing around of stuff, so after using that for quite a while i switched to kubuntu. i'd been curious about i3 for quite a while so now i'm running what's technically kubuntu but i only ever use i3 on it.
sometime in the future i might switch to arch with i3, just to give that a try. but for now i'm quite happy with an ubuntu base, since i know how it works and how to fix things. otoh when i switch i might just end up using debian with i3, but idk yet, i kind of like more recent packages.
I use debian unstable, so stuff is pretty new. There's a few packages like Firefox where they intentionally go with an older version, but you can add mozilla's repository to keep up to date with...
I use debian unstable, so stuff is pretty new. There's a few packages like Firefox where they intentionally go with an older version, but you can add mozilla's repository to keep up to date with the latest.
It used to be the unstable branch really was unstable, but I haven't encountered a problem in years. The closest I've had is broken packages that get fixed within a few hours, so I just try apt update, apt upgrade later in the day and it's fine.
This for me is the best of both worlds. A rolling release where things are almost as fresh as Arch, but with better package management, less manually tweaking things, and you can often install deb packages that are meant for ubuntu, which is really handy since it's so popular.
Yeah I'm also on Debian Unstable for my desktop. The Debian community tends to be viciously against anything not stable but as long as you're not an idiot about it breakage is rare and usually...
Yeah I'm also on Debian Unstable for my desktop. The Debian community tends to be viciously against anything not stable but as long as you're not an idiot about it breakage is rare and usually fixed quickly. I just can't defend using year old software for desktops. Servers, sure, whatever.
Sometimes I run elementary os from an usb stick on my windows laptop. Seriously thinking of getting a laptop without OS and just install lightweight linux distro on it. Why? I like the idea behind...
Sometimes I run elementary os from an usb stick on my windows laptop.
Seriously thinking of getting a laptop without OS and just install lightweight linux distro on it.
Why?
I like the idea behind chrome os, as I do find myself doing 90% of my work on my browser. So I guess a lightweight linux distro is a good compromise, just to mostly run firefox.
I mentioned ChromiumOS because I don't think it's possible to run ChromeOS on a non-chromebook. I would definitely recommend a chromebook if that was a possibility. I think not having the...
I mentioned ChromiumOS because I don't think it's possible to run ChromeOS on a non-chromebook. I would definitely recommend a chromebook if that was a possibility. I think not having the playstore is a pretty big issue.
I prefer Firefox to be honest. I don't think ChromeOS/ChromiumOS doesn't really have that option. I might rethink about it if I can actually buy a decent chromebook in my country :/
I prefer Firefox to be honest. I don't think ChromeOS/ChromiumOS doesn't really have that option.
I might rethink about it if I can actually buy a decent chromebook in my country :/
Some Chromebooks have support for Android apps, and others are slowly gaining access to run a Linux VM more tightly coupled with the OS as opposed to the previous methods. Looks pretty cool so far!
Some Chromebooks have support for Android apps, and others are slowly gaining access to run a Linux VM more tightly coupled with the OS as opposed to the previous methods. Looks pretty cool so far!
yeah, I am happy with my chromebook so far (only been 2 weeks so far). I think having the added playstore makes a huge difference. I will admit that I deliberately bought it as a 'media...
yeah, I am happy with my chromebook so far (only been 2 weeks so far). I think having the added playstore makes a huge difference.
I will admit that I deliberately bought it as a 'media consumption device', with programming as a secondary. So it is mainly used for communication, movies and reading. Essentially day-to-day life.
I have a work laptop which runs Linux and I use for all of my programming. Although this is definitely possible. I'm currently evaluating possibilities for online programming environments. As I would like the opportunity if the need arises.
I considered it, but as I mentioned in my parent comment, I want it to 'just work'. I haven't even enabled developer-mode for it. It is a vanilla setup. I have my other laptop for hacking, or I...
I considered it, but as I mentioned in my parent comment, I want it to 'just work'. I haven't even enabled developer-mode for it. It is a vanilla setup. I have my other laptop for hacking, or I spin up a VPS.
I've been on Solus for almost 2 years now. Why? It used to boot up stupid fast and had quick package updates. These days, boot times have been crawling, and even important packages sometimes lag...
I've been on Solus for almost 2 years now. Why? It used to boot up stupid fast and had quick package updates. These days, boot times have been crawling, and even important packages sometimes lag behind, apparent from kernel being downdated to unsupported 4.15 for almost two weeks. It is becoming clear, that as much as Ikey and Josh and Peter are working, they may not be enough.
I'm thinking of jumping ship again, eyeing Gentoo or NixOS this time. But my PC isn't new(i7 second gen), and I can't afford a VPS for updates alone. So maybe Gentoo could prove too much (I happen to like plasma desktop, lots of compiling). Anybody running Gentoo want to chime in and give me a realistic clue on how long it could take to update some 200 odd packages on a usual system? With plasma, libre office and Firefox?
Another candidate is NixOS, but it is too new and also sometimes lags with packages, but I'll take info from already users here too.
Void! It's in a bit of a rough spot right now because the project lead disappeared, but it's really good. rolling release, minimal libressl SystemD free, uses a minimal init system called runit...
Void! It's in a bit of a rough spot right now because the project lead disappeared, but it's really good.
rolling release, minimal
libressl
SystemD free, uses a minimal init system called runit instead (it's super quick)
I love Void Linux. XBPS is the most sane package manager for daily use in my opinion, and I really appreciate how granular packages are in regards to dependencies and header files, even if I end...
I love Void Linux. XBPS is the most sane package manager for daily use in my opinion, and I really appreciate how granular packages are in regards to dependencies and header files, even if I end up installing 90% of them.
Ubuntu + Gnome (now that Ubuntu 18 supports Gnome out of the box, this decision is less-noteworthy but as I haven't switched yet I figured I'd mention it.)
Ubuntu + Gnome (now that Ubuntu 18 supports Gnome out of the box, this decision is less-noteworthy but as I haven't switched yet I figured I'd mention it.)
For desktop Ubuntu. For headless/server I pick Ubuntu nowadays as well, but CentOS comes in a very close second and was my previous choice for a very long time.
For desktop Ubuntu. For headless/server I pick Ubuntu nowadays as well, but CentOS comes in a very close second and was my previous choice for a very long time.
I've only really messed with Kali and Tails. I'm interested in the whole pentesting/cyber security/privacy aspect. Still have no idea what I am doing. I've heard of Whonix, but haven't done...
I've only really messed with Kali and Tails. I'm interested in the whole pentesting/cyber security/privacy aspect. Still have no idea what I am doing. I've heard of Whonix, but haven't done anything past that.
I use GalliumOS because I'm on a chromebook. I could probably run a more mainstream distro at this point but I like the touchpad drivers. On top of that I run the Neon PPAs because I really enjoy...
I use GalliumOS because I'm on a chromebook. I could probably run a more mainstream distro at this point but I like the touchpad drivers.
On top of that I run the Neon PPAs because I really enjoy KDE. Since both are based on Ubuntu LTS, my setup works well.
Well, I use Ubuntu for my dev machine. Why? Because it usually just works, has a nice clean interface and I can devote most of my time to getting work done instead of fiddling with the system, but...
Well, I use Ubuntu for my dev machine. Why? Because it usually just works, has a nice clean interface and I can devote most of my time to getting work done instead of fiddling with the system, but it also allows me to edit internals and hack around if the need arises.
Fedora is my all time favorite because I'm so used to using CentOS it's nice to use familiar tools at home. I've been wanting to get into Arch but I'm just not feeling all the extra work for all...
Fedora is my all time favorite because I'm so used to using CentOS it's nice to use familiar tools at home. I've been wanting to get into Arch but I'm just not feeling all the extra work for all the applications. I like to fine tune SOME applications such as nginx, but not all applications because I don't care about the optimization all that much. Gentoo requires even more work so I don't see myself ever using it except on an old laptop that needs the be optimized to run.
Currently using Fedora, might switch to Debian soon though, since I'm having issues with Steam atm :/ I've used arch in the past and really enjoyed it, might install it on a desktop if I get one.
Currently using Fedora, might switch to Debian soon though, since I'm having issues with Steam atm :/
I've used arch in the past and really enjoyed it, might install it on a desktop if I get one.
Linux Mint with the KDE desktop. Mint is basically Ubuntu but things like DVDs and Flash and other things work without needing extra setup. (ubuntu being the most popular linux distro, means you...
Linux Mint with the KDE desktop.
Mint is basically Ubuntu but things like DVDs and Flash and other things work without needing extra setup. (ubuntu being the most popular linux distro, means you will be compatible with almost all linux software without needing extra setup.)
KDE because it has loads of features and customize-ability.
Funtoo for desktop (home), laptop (work) and some more powerful servers. FreeBSD for less powerful servers (although this does not use the Linux kernel). I have a media pc on Arch because it was...
Funtoo for desktop (home), laptop (work) and some more powerful servers. FreeBSD for less powerful servers (although this does not use the Linux kernel). I have a media pc on Arch because it was easier to get the drivers up and running with it, so I can get hardware accelerated graphics for gaming (with xbox controller). I also have a Raspberry Pi running Raspbian, since that's the most default distro available for it, and I use it to test the tutorials I write.
Ubuntu breaks much too often if you want to do anything beyond the bare basics for me, and Arch is not a great distro for people who like customization, so I don't use either of those for my "serious" setups. I also don't enjoy apt, pacman, yum or any other package manager as much as Portage.
Arch on my desktop-- I like being able to get a custom install with just what I want, and once its set up, it is largely one I don't have to think about, aside from one or two updates a year that...
Arch on my desktop-- I like being able to get a custom install with just what I want, and once its set up, it is largely one I don't have to think about, aside from one or two updates a year that require (usually, but not always) simple manual interventions.
I run Ubuntu 14.04 on my VMs (servers) It's fantastic out of the box and I can immediately start writing code and deploying. I also run 18.04 on a ViritualBox VM as a browsing machine. I like to...
I run Ubuntu 14.04 on my VMs (servers) It's fantastic out of the box and I can immediately start writing code and deploying.
I also run 18.04 on a ViritualBox VM as a browsing machine. I like to keep my Windows machine clean for games.
No, but I can wager a guess for you. The more graphically and CPU-intensive a desktop environment is, the more taxing it will be on your battery. Ubuntu uses GNOME3, and Kubuntu uses KDE. These...
No, but I can wager a guess for you. The more graphically and CPU-intensive a desktop environment is, the more taxing it will be on your battery.
Ubuntu uses GNOME3, and Kubuntu uses KDE. These are bound to be the most resource-hungry. They're prettier, and easier to use, but might shorten your battery life.
Ubuntu MATE uses MATE, which is a fork of oldschool GNOME2, which is a full-fledged desktop environment with all the bells and whistles, however it probably uses less memory, cpu, and has fewer visual effects.
Xubuntu uses XFCE, which tastes a bit like GNOME2, but probably consumes fewer resources. I believe a compositing windowmanager is not enabled by default, so things will look uglier, but not use your graphics card as much. The preferences and settings control panel stuff is a bit jankier than the above distros.
And finally, Lubuntu I think is going to be the lightest weight. It uses LXDE for its desktop environment, which feels a bit like Windows XP. Things are going to be rougher around the edges, but this would arguably consume the least power.
So that covers those flavours out-of-the-box, but a lot of tweaking can be done to any linux system to improve battery life. You don't necessarily need to run KDE on Kubuntu, the distro is just a collection of pre-installed stuff. You could run a lighter desktop environment / window manager like openbox or the myriad of tiling windowmanagers out there which are super light, like i3 and awesome.
Then, there's a bunch of other settings that can be changed. Firstly, install the "lmt" package, this will do a lot of tweaking for you. There's also a bunch of kernel parameters and different tweaks you can do to change your processor's frequency scaling etc. You can also disable devices you're never going to use like bluetooth or webcam etc. You can also set LCD brightness or change the agressiveness of disk writes etc.
This is a pretty deep topic though. You could become obsessed with squeezing every last minute out of your battery if you want. You'll end up spending more time than is worth it though. The rabbit hole is very deep.
Hmm. Yeah I dunno, there's a ton of variables. Like an overwhelming amount of them. The kernel version, kernel options, and config files make a huge difference, you're right. I'm guessing maybe...
Hmm. Yeah I dunno, there's a ton of variables. Like an overwhelming amount of them. The kernel version, kernel options, and config files make a huge difference, you're right.
I'm guessing maybe you have newer hardware, and between 2016 and 2018 the kernel was updated to include better support for your system.
My thoughts are that Ubuntu 18.04 vs Xubuntu 18.04 should have all the same kernel version, drivers, and configurations, with the only difference being the DE. Whereas something like Ubuntu vs Fedora both use GNOME, I doubt they have the same power consumption.
I run Gallium, which is a tweaked Xubuntu on a Toshiba Chromebook 2. I'm running i3-gaps-next under xfce and it runs like a dream on the somewhat low-end hardware.
I run Gallium, which is a tweaked Xubuntu on a Toshiba Chromebook 2. I'm running i3-gaps-next under xfce and it runs like a dream on the somewhat low-end hardware.
Last year I was looking for a nice beginner friendly distro and landed on mint, I still love it and am still using it but I am looking for a more hands-on distro now, where I know what is...
Last year I was looking for a nice beginner friendly distro and landed on mint, I still love it and am still using it but I am looking for a more hands-on distro now, where I know what is installed and doesn't have as much preloaded (currently looking forward to trying out Arch Linux)
Ubuntu. I've used it since 4.10 and it has never let me down. Currently using Ubuntu Budgie as the main OS on my laptop and in every development VM I run.
Ubuntu. I've used it since 4.10 and it has never let me down. Currently using Ubuntu Budgie as the main OS on my laptop and in every development VM I run.
Got into the game with Ubuntu (secondary desktops at home and work), and because it's easy I haven't seen a good reason to change. As for servers, I've decided to delve into CentOS. Much steeper...
Got into the game with Ubuntu (secondary desktops at home and work), and because it's easy I haven't seen a good reason to change.
As for servers, I've decided to delve into CentOS. Much steeper learning curve, but the learning is good.
Distro-hopped for a while, settled with Fedora+Gnome. Pretty much just works, dnf is fine, perfect for daily driver/workstation. I'm less inclined to ricing and tweaking as in the past as I don't...
Distro-hopped for a while, settled with Fedora+Gnome. Pretty much just works, dnf is fine, perfect for daily driver/workstation. I'm less inclined to ricing and tweaking as in the past as I don't have the time so not too concerned with an opinionated DE.
The Ubuntu family is definitely a great "run and forget" style of OS. Very beginner friendly and stable and usually my first choice for server os.
Within those I prefer Xubuntu for its stable and minimalistic Xfce desktop, but it comes just down to preference which is super nice to have.
Lately I tried out manjaro, which is a flavour of archlinux, but more accessible (simple ubuntu-like install, UI apps for package/kernel management) and it runs super fast and stable. Even switched to KDE for that, don't regret anything so far. Can recommend checking that out.
Is there a way to move from Ubuntu to Xubuntu that isn't a nightmare or where I won't end up losing my data?
I love XCFE and use it at work. Unity is OK and I'm liking it more now that I figured out how to move the menu bar to the bottom of the screen instead of the left-hand side, but I don't know, XCFE still feels like home. My understanding is I'd need to move to XuBuntu to run XCFE - let me know if I've misunderstood please.
TIL. Thank you!
Arch Linux! I love it because of the simplicity. I know what I installed, I know where my configs are, and I know what all the processes running on my system are at any time (coughwindowscough). In terms of drivers and hardware (Nvidia GPU, bluetooth, printers, etc), it's been the easiest experience I've ever had, whereas these types of devices tend to have problems on Linux (at least in the past). This is all partially attributed to the fantastic Arch Linux wiki, which is incredibly helpful with Linux in general, not just Arch. The AUR also has just about every piece of software that I've ever needed, and when it didn't, pacman/makepkg makes it really easy to create a package using a PKGBUILD.
I agree with what what said, but In case you're unfamiliar with Arch, you should be warned that the installation process is trickier than other distros. There are guides online that will walk you through it, but it requires doing a lot of things manually that the installers for other distros do for you. The trade-off is that you become really familiar with how your system is put together and what's on it.
After the installation is over though, I think it's one of the more simple distros to use, mostly thanks to the AUR and the Arch Wiki, like what mentioned.
I use arch too, btw.
The thing I appreciated the most at first was the near total absence of patching. If I couldn't find arch specific docs, it didn't really matter. As long as the upstream has reasonable docs I am all set because the chances are arch didn't add or take anything away. That's huge.
Now I have gotten so used to that the thing that I love the most is PKGBUILDs. Be they supplied by the official arch devs, TUs, the AUR, or my own. I can repackage my own applications in minutes and have them installed just like anything else.
I use Ubuntu primarily because the community support is better than any other distro. Because it's used by a lot of newbies there's an abundance of threads answering every question you ever thought to ask.
I use Ubuntu for the same reason, though I'm thinking about switching to Debian because it separates its software into free and nonfree repos and I want to use as much free software as possible.
Linux Mint. It's a better version of Ubuntu. Apparently they now have one which is directly Debian-based now as well.
I used to use Arch Linux, but I don't have time for that right now.
I'm using POP!_OS. Very good so far. I'm a linux novice.
Kubuntu for me.
I like how user friendly it is, and enjoy KDE more than any other DE.
I see no reason to switch, although /g/ makes me want to try Debian
Me too. I mainly run Windows, and kde is closer to the Windows UI than most other distros. So when I use Linux for whatever reason it's easier for me.
I run NixOS, I used to move between Ubuntu/Arch. But I found that NixOS was really interesting as a different way to build a system. I spent a lot of time figuring out configuration values, and configuring services on servers. I found NixOS to be the easiest to setup a new comparable system within a minimal amount of time!
Debian/Ubuntu, because it runs on almost everything. I got tired really early on of everything being in a different spot/done differently in CentOS, and in NetBSD, and in Arch, and in Slack... settled on Debian since it runs on my old PC, my laptop, my headless servers, and my ARM SBCs.
I'm a chronic distro hopper. I was on Fedora last month, Ubuntu the month before that, Gentoo before. Now I'm on Arch, but I'm eyeing NixOS, it looks interesting. May install it next month, give it a go for a bit.
For a production environment, though? I'll take Debian 99% of the time.
I used normal ubuntu for a while, but was kind of done with unity after a bit, and gave ub-gnome a try for a while. Gnome is nice, but doesn't allow much changing around of stuff, so after using that for quite a while i switched to kubuntu. i'd been curious about i3 for quite a while so now i'm running what's technically kubuntu but i only ever use i3 on it.
sometime in the future i might switch to arch with i3, just to give that a try. but for now i'm quite happy with an ubuntu base, since i know how it works and how to fix things. otoh when i switch i might just end up using debian with i3, but idk yet, i kind of like more recent packages.
I use debian unstable, so stuff is pretty new. There's a few packages like Firefox where they intentionally go with an older version, but you can add mozilla's repository to keep up to date with the latest.
It used to be the unstable branch really was unstable, but I haven't encountered a problem in years. The closest I've had is broken packages that get fixed within a few hours, so I just try
apt update,apt upgradelater in the day and it's fine.This for me is the best of both worlds. A rolling release where things are almost as fresh as Arch, but with better package management, less manually tweaking things, and you can often install deb packages that are meant for ubuntu, which is really handy since it's so popular.
Yeah I'm also on Debian Unstable for my desktop. The Debian community tends to be viciously against anything not stable but as long as you're not an idiot about it breakage is rare and usually fixed quickly. I just can't defend using year old software for desktops. Servers, sure, whatever.
Manjaro Linux. It's like arch, but easier to install and maintain. Zero complaints.
Add another vote for Manjaro.
Ye, I use to run Ubuntu and Mint... but Manjaro is looking very appealing at the moment!
Sometimes I run elementary os from an usb stick on my windows laptop.
Seriously thinking of getting a laptop without OS and just install lightweight linux distro on it.
Why?
I like the idea behind chrome os, as I do find myself doing 90% of my work on my browser. So I guess a lightweight linux distro is a good compromise, just to mostly run firefox.
What about ChromiumOS? I looked into it, and it seems like it is definitely possible. No flash/netflix though.
Why ChromiumOS over ChromeOS?
Chromium doesn't have the Play Store.
I mentioned ChromiumOS because I don't think it's possible to run ChromeOS on a non-chromebook. I would definitely recommend a chromebook if that was a possibility. I think not having the playstore is a pretty big issue.
I prefer Firefox to be honest. I don't think ChromeOS/ChromiumOS doesn't really have that option.
I might rethink about it if I can actually buy a decent chromebook in my country :/
Some Chromebooks have support for Android apps, and others are slowly gaining access to run a Linux VM more tightly coupled with the OS as opposed to the previous methods. Looks pretty cool so far!
Wow, it does look cool :D
yeah, I am happy with my chromebook so far (only been 2 weeks so far). I think having the added playstore makes a huge difference.
I will admit that I deliberately bought it as a 'media consumption device', with programming as a secondary. So it is mainly used for communication, movies and reading. Essentially day-to-day life.
I have a work laptop which runs Linux and I use for all of my programming. Although this is definitely possible. I'm currently evaluating possibilities for online programming environments. As I would like the opportunity if the need arises.
If you have chromebook, have you tried GalliumOS? https://galliumos.org/
I considered it, but as I mentioned in my parent comment, I want it to 'just work'. I haven't even enabled developer-mode for it. It is a vanilla setup. I have my other laptop for hacking, or I spin up a VPS.
Sounds like a nice setup :)
Sadly, there's just no good chromebooks available here. I'd love to try one.
You can install Firefox via Crostini.
Ah, I just knew about this. Thanks for the info.
I've been on Solus for almost 2 years now. Why? It used to boot up stupid fast and had quick package updates. These days, boot times have been crawling, and even important packages sometimes lag behind, apparent from kernel being downdated to unsupported 4.15 for almost two weeks. It is becoming clear, that as much as Ikey and Josh and Peter are working, they may not be enough.
I'm thinking of jumping ship again, eyeing Gentoo or NixOS this time. But my PC isn't new(i7 second gen), and I can't afford a VPS for updates alone. So maybe Gentoo could prove too much (I happen to like plasma desktop, lots of compiling). Anybody running Gentoo want to chime in and give me a realistic clue on how long it could take to update some 200 odd packages on a usual system? With plasma, libre office and Firefox?
Another candidate is NixOS, but it is too new and also sometimes lags with packages, but I'll take info from already users here too.
Any other suggestions welcome.
Void! It's in a bit of a rough spot right now because the project lead disappeared, but it's really good.
rolling release, minimal
libressl
SystemD free, uses a minimal init system called runit instead (it's super quick)
Support for MUSL over glibc
amazing custom package manager xbps
super friendly community
I love Void Linux. XBPS is the most sane package manager for daily use in my opinion, and I really appreciate how granular packages are in regards to dependencies and header files, even if I end up installing 90% of them.
Yeah, I haven't gotten too into
xbps-srceither. I mean to, once I move back to Void as a daily driver.Ubuntu + Gnome (now that Ubuntu 18 supports Gnome out of the box, this decision is less-noteworthy but as I haven't switched yet I figured I'd mention it.)
For desktop Ubuntu. For headless/server I pick Ubuntu nowadays as well, but CentOS comes in a very close second and was my previous choice for a very long time.
I've only really messed with Kali and Tails. I'm interested in the whole pentesting/cyber security/privacy aspect. Still have no idea what I am doing. I've heard of Whonix, but haven't done anything past that.
I use Gentoo. My CPU is plenty fast enough, and I appreciate the flexibility.
I use GalliumOS because I'm on a chromebook. I could probably run a more mainstream distro at this point but I like the touchpad drivers.
On top of that I run the Neon PPAs because I really enjoy KDE. Since both are based on Ubuntu LTS, my setup works well.
Mint. As fun as playing with the OS is, when I'm at the point where I'm spending more time fixing the OS than using it, it's not worth it.
Well, I use Ubuntu for my dev machine. Why? Because it usually just works, has a nice clean interface and I can devote most of my time to getting work done instead of fiddling with the system, but it also allows me to edit internals and hack around if the need arises.
Fedora is my all time favorite because I'm so used to using CentOS it's nice to use familiar tools at home. I've been wanting to get into Arch but I'm just not feeling all the extra work for all the applications. I like to fine tune SOME applications such as nginx, but not all applications because I don't care about the optimization all that much. Gentoo requires even more work so I don't see myself ever using it except on an old laptop that needs the be optimized to run.
Currently using Fedora, might switch to Debian soon though, since I'm having issues with Steam atm :/
I've used arch in the past and really enjoyed it, might install it on a desktop if I get one.
Linux Mint with the KDE desktop.
Mint is basically Ubuntu but things like DVDs and Flash and other things work without needing extra setup. (ubuntu being the most popular linux distro, means you will be compatible with almost all linux software without needing extra setup.)
KDE because it has loads of features and customize-ability.
Funtoo for desktop (home), laptop (work) and some more powerful servers. FreeBSD for less powerful servers (although this does not use the Linux kernel). I have a media pc on Arch because it was easier to get the drivers up and running with it, so I can get hardware accelerated graphics for gaming (with xbox controller). I also have a Raspberry Pi running Raspbian, since that's the most default distro available for it, and I use it to test the tutorials I write.
Ubuntu breaks much too often if you want to do anything beyond the bare basics for me, and Arch is not a great distro for people who like customization, so I don't use either of those for my "serious" setups. I also don't enjoy apt, pacman, yum or any other package manager as much as Portage.
Arch on my desktop-- I like being able to get a custom install with just what I want, and once its set up, it is largely one I don't have to think about, aside from one or two updates a year that require (usually, but not always) simple manual interventions.
I run Ubuntu 14.04 on my VMs (servers) It's fantastic out of the box and I can immediately start writing code and deploying.
I also run 18.04 on a ViritualBox VM as a browsing machine. I like to keep my Windows machine clean for games.
Does anyone have any comparison between the various Ubuntu flavors in terms of battery life on laptops?
No, but I can wager a guess for you. The more graphically and CPU-intensive a desktop environment is, the more taxing it will be on your battery.
Ubuntu uses GNOME3, and Kubuntu uses KDE. These are bound to be the most resource-hungry. They're prettier, and easier to use, but might shorten your battery life.
Ubuntu MATE uses MATE, which is a fork of oldschool GNOME2, which is a full-fledged desktop environment with all the bells and whistles, however it probably uses less memory, cpu, and has fewer visual effects.
Xubuntu uses XFCE, which tastes a bit like GNOME2, but probably consumes fewer resources. I believe a compositing windowmanager is not enabled by default, so things will look uglier, but not use your graphics card as much. The preferences and settings control panel stuff is a bit jankier than the above distros.
And finally, Lubuntu I think is going to be the lightest weight. It uses LXDE for its desktop environment, which feels a bit like Windows XP. Things are going to be rougher around the edges, but this would arguably consume the least power.
So that covers those flavours out-of-the-box, but a lot of tweaking can be done to any linux system to improve battery life. You don't necessarily need to run KDE on Kubuntu, the distro is just a collection of pre-installed stuff. You could run a lighter desktop environment / window manager like openbox or the myriad of tiling windowmanagers out there which are super light, like i3 and awesome.
Then, there's a bunch of other settings that can be changed. Firstly, install the "lmt" package, this will do a lot of tweaking for you. There's also a bunch of kernel parameters and different tweaks you can do to change your processor's frequency scaling etc. You can also disable devices you're never going to use like bluetooth or webcam etc. You can also set LCD brightness or change the agressiveness of disk writes etc.
This is a pretty deep topic though. You could become obsessed with squeezing every last minute out of your battery if you want. You'll end up spending more time than is worth it though. The rabbit hole is very deep.
Here's a good start for reading: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Power_management
Hmm. Yeah I dunno, there's a ton of variables. Like an overwhelming amount of them. The kernel version, kernel options, and config files make a huge difference, you're right.
I'm guessing maybe you have newer hardware, and between 2016 and 2018 the kernel was updated to include better support for your system.
My thoughts are that Ubuntu 18.04 vs Xubuntu 18.04 should have all the same kernel version, drivers, and configurations, with the only difference being the DE. Whereas something like Ubuntu vs Fedora both use GNOME, I doubt they have the same power consumption.
Well thats more than I was expecting. Thanks for that, just waiting on cash for my next laptop.
I run Gallium, which is a tweaked Xubuntu on a Toshiba Chromebook 2. I'm running i3-gaps-next under xfce and it runs like a dream on the somewhat low-end hardware.
Manjaro!
Last year I was looking for a nice beginner friendly distro and landed on mint, I still love it and am still using it but I am looking for a more hands-on distro now, where I know what is installed and doesn't have as much preloaded (currently looking forward to trying out Arch Linux)
Ubuntu. I've used it since 4.10 and it has never let me down. Currently using Ubuntu Budgie as the main OS on my laptop and in every development VM I run.
Got into the game with Ubuntu (secondary desktops at home and work), and because it's easy I haven't seen a good reason to change.
As for servers, I've decided to delve into CentOS. Much steeper learning curve, but the learning is good.
Distro-hopped for a while, settled with Fedora+Gnome. Pretty much just works, dnf is fine, perfect for daily driver/workstation. I'm less inclined to ricing and tweaking as in the past as I don't have the time so not too concerned with an opinionated DE.