If you need secure boot on current (like intel gen 10+), Fedora Workstation. If you don’t need secure boot, Linux Mint.
Fedora has the easiest way to make secure boot just work, it will even dual boot fine on the same disk although you should still backup the m$ partition if you actually need it. Fedora can do secure boot even with Nvidia.
Ubuntu can do some of the secure boot stuff like Fedora does, and there is the advantage of the stable kernel if you have Nvidia.
Note that “stable” as a label has nothing to do with its intuitive meaning like alpha/beta/testing/crashing etc. It is a term for servers and people that want to run very specific setups that will not require human intervention on embedded devices and servers. If you want to game or use the latest sw “stable” might be a pain. However, if what you are running is not kept up to date with the latest packages and libraries, a stable release may be the only way to run your stuff.
Overall these are the biggest factors on current hardware; secure boot yes/no, and up-to-date software needs yes/no.
Mint is easy mode, but has no secure boot shim implemented. It makes gaming accessible.
Pop is made for System76 and does some stuff funny IMO, and is like Mint with no secure boot if you are not running 76’s proprietary bootloader on their hardware
Ubuntu is easy but has its quirks (most are fixed by Mint which is based on Debian/Ubuntu)
Debian is hard mode and is an advanced distro. There are a ton of tools that are unique to Debian. It is used mostly for people running their own servers and custom purpose machines from home or work. It is also the primary distro for hacking hardware and reverse engineering stuff that has no other way to create Linux kernel support.
Every distro has some things that they are specialized for. You can do almost anything with any of them, but it will depend on your skill level. Something to keep in mind here is that Linux is not a consumerism branding contest. We are not choosing our frivolous teams. This is the place where everyone can learn. While beginners and users are welcome, you will find many aspects of Linux are the study and thesis projects for many computer science students. All levels are present here. This is why so many options exist.
Debian is hard mode and is an advanced distro. There are a ton of tools that are unique to Debian. It is used mostly for people running their own servers and custom purpose machines from home or work. It is also the primary distro for hacking hardware and reverse engineering stuff that has no other way to create Linux kernel support.
While I get it I don’t agree with the first part. If you install Debian out of the box with GNOME it will work out just fine for the majority of people, usually it will work out better than Mint, Arch and whatnot because it is a finished and very reliable OS, not something targeted for experimentation.
It is not really a complete experience. It is ugly, and for the type of person that wants to play in the weeds
Wtf are you even talking about? Setup Debian with all the defaults, it’s easier than Windows and you’ll get GNOME out of the box. Ugly?
or figuring out flatpaks
Running 2 commands to get all the flatpak software into the GNOME GUI store is very hard :P
Debian provides a solid out of the box experience, a system that won’t break and will be compatible with most of the decent hardware out there. It won’t complain and bitch, it won’t be an half finished product like Arch. If it’s too complicated just get Ubuntu and enjoy it’s mangled kernel.
Arch / Gentoo are the real “base installs” here, nobody can run those things out of the box without tweaks. Arch doesn’t even have an installer, just a bunch of scripts and 3rd party attempts and making something usable and you’re recommending over Debian that has a full GUI with sane defaults?
I’d go with Mint. They have thought out 99% of the things a user might ask for in a DE, along some basic admin configuration stuff you might need. It’s the best out of the box distro.
If you need secure boot on current (like intel gen 10+), Fedora Workstation. If you don’t need secure boot, Linux Mint.
Fedora has the easiest way to make secure boot just work, it will even dual boot fine on the same disk although you should still backup the m$ partition if you actually need it. Fedora can do secure boot even with Nvidia.
Ubuntu can do some of the secure boot stuff like Fedora does, and there is the advantage of the stable kernel if you have Nvidia.
Note that “stable” as a label has nothing to do with its intuitive meaning like alpha/beta/testing/crashing etc. It is a term for servers and people that want to run very specific setups that will not require human intervention on embedded devices and servers. If you want to game or use the latest sw “stable” might be a pain. However, if what you are running is not kept up to date with the latest packages and libraries, a stable release may be the only way to run your stuff.
Overall these are the biggest factors on current hardware; secure boot yes/no, and up-to-date software needs yes/no.
Which of these would you suggest: Debian, Ubuntu, Pop!_OS or Linux Mint?
Mint is easy mode, but has no secure boot shim implemented. It makes gaming accessible.
Pop is made for System76 and does some stuff funny IMO, and is like Mint with no secure boot if you are not running 76’s proprietary bootloader on their hardware
Ubuntu is easy but has its quirks (most are fixed by Mint which is based on Debian/Ubuntu)
Debian is hard mode and is an advanced distro. There are a ton of tools that are unique to Debian. It is used mostly for people running their own servers and custom purpose machines from home or work. It is also the primary distro for hacking hardware and reverse engineering stuff that has no other way to create Linux kernel support.
Every distro has some things that they are specialized for. You can do almost anything with any of them, but it will depend on your skill level. Something to keep in mind here is that Linux is not a consumerism branding contest. We are not choosing our frivolous teams. This is the place where everyone can learn. While beginners and users are welcome, you will find many aspects of Linux are the study and thesis projects for many computer science students. All levels are present here. This is why so many options exist.
While I get it I don’t agree with the first part. If you install Debian out of the box with GNOME it will work out just fine for the majority of people, usually it will work out better than Mint, Arch and whatnot because it is a finished and very reliable OS, not something targeted for experimentation.
deleted by creator
I never experienced this with tons of machines, besides Debian now comes with proprietary blobs for that kind of hardware out of the box as well.
That ISO no longer exists. It’s all now on the base image.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Yeah, it is also full or DEB GNOME stuff and has no podman, distrobox or flatpak support.
Debian is nice but “neutral”
Wtf are you even talking about? Setup Debian with all the defaults, it’s easier than Windows and you’ll get GNOME out of the box. Ugly?
Running 2 commands to get all the flatpak software into the GNOME GUI store is very hard :P
Debian provides a solid out of the box experience, a system that won’t break and will be compatible with most of the decent hardware out there. It won’t complain and bitch, it won’t be an half finished product like Arch. If it’s too complicated just get Ubuntu and enjoy it’s mangled kernel.
Arch / Gentoo are the real “base installs” here, nobody can run those things out of the box without tweaks. Arch doesn’t even have an installer, just a bunch of scripts and 3rd party attempts and making something usable and you’re recommending over Debian that has a full GUI with sane defaults?
Very well put.
I’d go with Mint. They have thought out 99% of the things a user might ask for in a DE, along some basic admin configuration stuff you might need. It’s the best out of the box distro.