Ask HN: Why did you choose a particular “flavor” of Linux? | Hacker News Reader

Ask HN: Why did you choose a particular “flavor” of Linux?

I'm thinking about jumping ship from OS X, and buying a machine to run a "true" distribution of Linux. I'm wondering what are some of the pros-cons of particular Linux "flavors."

View on HN

I use Arch Linux because I get to choose exactly what is running on my system. Arch also has the most active community as well, IMHO. If there's ever any doubt how to do something, the Arch Wiki will show you how to do it, often 5 different ways.

One of the biggest pluses of Arch is the Arch User Repository. If a package for something doesn't exist, someone will put it in the AUR for you. Whenever some software is released for a specific Linux distro, I assume Arch gets it too and I'm almost always right. I like Mint Linux's UI a lot (that's Mint Linux's main selling point) so I installed it on Arch with one command. Steam only worked with Ubuntu when it was released for Linux... except I installed it on Arch with one command the next day. Spotify is tricky to get for Linux unless you use a Debian based distro... or Arch, in which case it's in the AUR ready to be installed with one command.

https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch_compared_to_other_...

I use both Mint and Ubuntu, on two separate computers.

Ubuntu is great except for the Unity crap. In theory, you can run Ubuntu without Unity but I gave up trying to remove it after the first 5 hours of work. If you are getting into Linux, its important to know that if the first few sets of instructions you find on forums do not work, you will need to be an expert to solve the problem. Normally forum instructions work great, just be aware that 90% of the time is not 100%.

Mint is great. Period. It does exactly what I want - to act like a 'standard windows' linux user interface without any crazy UI experiments getting in the way. I cannot recommend it highly enough.

It should also be noted that Mint is built on top of Ubuntu (and Ubuntu is built upon Debian). And from my experience, things in general that work on Debian or Ubuntu also work on Mint.

So if you're torn between the 3, pick Mint because it works out the box.

If you're choosing a distro for use on a workstation (desktop/laptop), just use Ubuntu. It has had miles more elbow grease put into it to make using it on a workstation nice than any other distro available.

If you're choosing a distro for use on a server, popular choices are Debian, CentOS, Red Hat, and Ubuntu Server. Which one is right for you will depend mostly on your priorities:

* Debian: 100% Free Software and nothing but

* Ubuntu: Debian plus some small-but-nice tweaks

* Red Hat: compatibility with Big Enterprise Software, for people who don't mind paying for their software

* CentOS: compatibility with Big Enterprise Software, for people who do

I switched from Ubuntu to Mint a few years ago while Canonical was rolling out Unity, because I found (and still find) the idea of a unified interface for PC, phone, tablet, and whatever the hell else, to be utterly absurd. Metro and Unity are in the same boat, as far as I'm concerned.

For those here using Ubuntu, has it gotten any better? Note that I did try Unity when it was first coming out and I hated it, so if you loved it then and are recommending it based on that I probably won't agree. I want to know, has it changed for the better?

It is snappier, the launcher/finder works relatively well but can take some times if you have too many lens. I quite like the keyboard shortcuts to glue a window in a corner, or to change workspace. That's about it. It does not get too much in the way. Nothing earth shattering and nothing too awful.

You don't need to use Unity with Ubuntu, I use the Ubuntu Gnome "official flavour".

At the moment I am using mint-kde on my workstation and I stick to the long support versions because I don't really like to reinstall my system each 9 months (yep I know I can save all there is in my home and the list of installed packages, but I lose all the /etc configuration file and I have a lot of configuration files on it). Of linux mint I love the fact is well supported, there is a community around it almost comparable to that of ubuntu (and you usually can solve problem of mint also looking at solutions based on debian and ubuntu) and all DEs work perfectly if you want to constantly switch.

On servers I usually just run ubuntu lts or debian stable based on the requirements

A question: why you speak about buying a new machine to run linux? If you have a macbook it is perfect for linux, I am waiting to have enough money to buy one with the explicit purpose to run linux on it

Oh yea, that's true. I could just install Linux on my mac.

I hesitated on saying that is because I may have a period where I have two computers to help with the transition.

I don't know how familiar you are with the Distros... as far as the major distros go (Debian/Ubuntu/Fedora/CentOS...), they all get the job done and the only difference you might stumble on in the beginning will be the different package management systems.

Anyway, i did not choose any flavour... i just happened to start out with Debian because a fried gave me the CD many years ago when a 700mb download was still a big thing. So i mastered Debian first and i still usually stick with Debian-based distros (such as Ubuntu, elementaryOS) if i have the choice. That being said i recommend Ubuntu for anyone that is getting into the Linux world, simply because the community and available resources are huge. If you run into any problems there is a 99% chance there is a easy to follow guide on how to fix it.

I tried installing Arch on my laptop and couldn't get it to work, so I went with Ubuntu because it was easy. Haven't had any problems so far, except one: I simply cannot get good results plugging my laptop into projectors. Either I can't mirror screens at all, or if I can, I end up at a lowest-common-denominator resolution, usually less than 1024x768. It could really become a dealbreaker for me, because I need to give a lot of presentations in places with their own projectors (e.g. classrooms). Anybody know if there's a Linux distribution that can do whatever magic Windows and Apple do when plugged into a projector?

Ubuntu, because it's the most popular desktop distribution right now. Software for the popular distributions tends to be more well distributed, tested, and supported.

I've run Linux as my desktop for 17 years and that's why I'm running Ubuntu. I hardly care at this point which distribution I run. They're mostly quite similar and almost all rely on exactly the same software for most of what they do.

+1 to Ubuntu. Meteor (officially) only supports Linux and OSX, so I run Ubuntu along Win7. Some time ago I tried Mint. Mint is basically last version of Ubuntu with windows inspired niceties (theme and drivers). I still prefer the main distro.

As a Windows user Linux environment hurts a bit. Windows have a GUI for almost everything, Linux not so, even if you can easily make stuff through Terminal (like installing software) that makes you think that Linux approach is not that bad. The problem is the huge learning curve (at least for an hobbyist as me). It's like driving a Ferrari at night without knowing how to use the lights. You feel the speed in the moments that you know what you are doing and can see the way but sometimes you have to completely stop because you are in the dark..

I use xubuntu because it's lightweight and runs fast on my weak laptop. I tried ubuntu before that but it became impossible to run anything else with it installed. Maybe I should have just changed the desktop environment but I thought why not go with xubuntu instead. I have been very happy with it. It's got everything that ubuntu does plus it uses fewer resources. Win win for me.

As a complete linux noob I chose debian/ubuntu to dual boot on my laptop as a sort of introduction into the wonderful world of linux. So far I've been blown away with how easy it is to accomplish certain tasks and how awesome the command line is compared to windows. I think in the future my next laptop will just be a thinkpad with ubuntu on it.

I chose Ubuntu because back in the day

- it was the easiest to install

- Had all (or most of) the packages I wanted

- the deb packages beat out rpm hands down (back in dependency hell days, things are way better now)

- when I had (or have even now) a problem, I could ALWAYS find a solution in the Ubuntu Communities.

I may have to tweak it on install, to get a decent UI, etc. But if that's the worst of it, it isn't all that bad.

"...to get a decent UI..."

Do you mean that you can install something other than Unity?

Yeah, classic Gnome or some other one with a bit more functionality.

I use Debian stable because I did not agree with Ubuntu's business plan at the time and since Ubuntu was Debian based it seemed like the easiest transition. The only downside is the 'old-ness'. I wanted to go with Jessie but the installer wouldn't work and I never bothered upgrading when I got stable installed.

I am an heavy windows user and now currently migrating to Linux. I chose ubuntu to begin with because of its popularity which in turn guarantees less overhead (essential for the new OS)

I'd say better get familiar with Linux first (go with Ubuntu it's the safest choice) and then see if there are any distros that fit your needs better. If you don't have time to spend on the OS, light-weight distributions might not be well suited. Other than that, I'd say stick to what you choose and you'll be fine :-)

That said, at this point in time, I use too many OSX-related programs to go back to Linux (I was using Gentoo 2001-2005 as desktop).

I don't dislike Ubuntu, but I do think that Unity is enough of an odd duck as a UX that a recommendation of Ubuntu to a Linux newcomer ought to mention that it's not for everyone.

Yea, I'm starting to think that Ubuntu is the best route (at least for my foray into Linux). Thanks atmosx.

I use Fedora, because it has the best SELinux support of the desktop-oriented distros.

i choose Fedora because Red Hat puts a lot of work into all aspects of the GNU/Linux ecosystem. I like Debian a lot (for philosophical reasons), but i prefer something a bit more opinionated for everyday desktop use.

Arch. I like to keep things light.

Arch as well. I like to keep things simple (as in the Unix philosophy).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com