A lot of distro recommendation threads focus on the questions that novices think are important, but leave out the questions people would have after experiencing the differences (things that distro-hoppers might ask). As such, answers vary between “use _____, I found it very user friendly” and “use whatever, you can turn any distro into any other, and tweak it to your needs.”

What are some questions that newbies should ask when deciding on which distro to use as the basis for their system. Things like “what package manager suits my needs and how do I try out different ones without changing distros?” Or “what is a desktop environment/window manager, and how do I figure out which suits me?” Or “how does an init system affect my user experience as a newbie?” Or “how what are the choices made by such-and-such distro during install?”

Bonus points for also answering the questions you propose (I don’t have answers, picked a distro and stuck with it)

  • atzanteol@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    14·
    19 days ago

    Newbies will ask stupid questions, that’s not their fault.

    The people answering should know better than to answer with their favorite distros.

    The correct answer is “pick a popular one and don’t worry about the differences, you’re too inexperienced to notice them anyway.”

    • nootux@lemmy.ml
      2·
      15 days ago

      I am new to linux, I chose mint due to its popularity and noted stability. I just wanted an OS that worked for me not against me that was beginner friendly for a user moving from windows 10. I have been on it for a while now, encountered the odd issue (facing a tricky one now) but working through them. I chose popularity because I thought if I encounter issues, I am more likely to find answers. Also, it must be popular for a reason.

      Just a new linux user agreeing with what you have to say.

  • throwaway403@programming.dev
    7·
    19 days ago

    I’d argue they’d have to answer (or at least think about) what their goldilocks is in terms of the following axis:

    • No defaults[1] <–:–|–:–> Highly opinionated[2]
    • Convenience <–:–|–:–> Security
    • Rolling release <–:–|–:–> Frozen packages/repository
    • Means to an end[3] <–:–|–:–> End in itself[4]

    1. That is, being required to set everything up by yourself. ↩︎

    2. That is, simply enjoy what someone else has decided for you. ↩︎

    3. That is, Linux/OS/distro itself ain’t that interesting; I just need it for XYZ. ↩︎

    4. That is, I want to engage with Linux/OS/distro itself. ↩︎

  • chrash0@lemmy.world
    4·
    19 days ago

    my hot take is that a distro at the end of the day is just a package manager and an install script.

    the question i would ask is: what do you want out of your package manager?

    this would be an odd question for your given non-Linux user because their package manager before was called “fuck it YOLO”.

    i’ll go through some that i use or have used.

    apt/rpm/etc: stable. designed for the Linux of the 90s. uptime is king. i end up using these usually out of network effects. some popular package uses it in their Docker file or my VPS only supports these. they’re boring, but that’s on purpose. updates are purposeful and vetted (relatively). these are your Debian, Fedora, Ubuntu, etc flavors.

    pacman: seriously just a great design philosophy imo next to the others. rolling release. no versions. fix forward. also with the AUR, you get your “fuck it YOLO” packages back in a way that they can actually be maintained, updated, or nuked as appropriate. if you ever caught yourself waiting for a CUDA release on apt, this is for you. Arch, Manjaro,… i think there’s a ton of vibe coded configs that all pretty much amount to Arch.

    nix(/maybe guix?): a software engineer’s package manager. everything is declarative, reproducible, and version controllable. what was that thing i installed last weekend? it’s in the commit log. need 3 different C compilers/graphic drivers/toolchain dependencies installed? handled by the OS, and cleaned up when those versions change. this is my current rig cuz it helps me keep a bunch of machines in sync for my home projects.

    Gentoo and LFS and anything else would be a bit much.

    • coltn@lemmy.mlEnglish
      2·
      20 days ago

      I’ve been using Chimera linux recently (coming from Arch), and APK v3 is so good. It is so fucking fast and it’s dependency management is next level. Also the world file is really cool. Pacman felt more powerful in some ways, but a bit slower and more cumbersome. I also have had it just remove dependencies that another package still needs, and optional dependencies aren’t handled as cleanly.

  • GustavoM@lemmy.worldEnglish
    3·
    18 days ago

    That is a lot of overthinking over something that isn’t a issue at all – any “newbie distro” can indeed “just werk” without the need to ask further questions like GPU type or daily needs.

  • folaht@lemmy.ml
    3·
    19 days ago

    What are some questions that newbies should ask when deciding on which distro to use as the basis for their system?

    Do I want to get rid of windows without too much hassle?

    • Yes? → Linux Mint
    • No? → Linux Mint

    Once you’re used to Linux Mint cinnamon, you can start hopping to other DEs like KDE, Gnome 3, Cosmic or XFCE.
    And then once you’re used to that, you can hop to other distros.

    • banause@feddit.org
      1·
      19 days ago

      At first I wanted to disagree. But honestly, the more I think about it, you are right.

  • BCsven@lemmy.ca
    2·
    20 days ago

    I’m not sure newbies should be dealing with package manager choices. Package manager is secondary to DE useability.

  • FoundFootFootage78@lemmy.mlEnglish
    2·
    19 days ago

    Putting aside the question, the answer is that they should use upstream or Mint, there are basically no exceptions.

  • mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    1·
    19 days ago

    Here’s my main questions:

    • What brand of graphics card do you have?
    • Do you primarily want to play games?
    • Do you want to tinker?
    • Do you prefer the look/feel of Windows or MacOS?

    While most distros support Nvidia cards, manually updating the drivers via CLI is a pain, especially the first time when things randomly break and it takes you 4 hours going through Ubuntu forums to find the answer because you don’t know what to ask. For new Linux users, always direct them to a distro with Nvidia drivers baked in.

    If they want to primarily game, I’d recommend pointing them to a distro with gaming optimizations and pre-installed gaming packages. This narrows it down to CachyOS, SteamOS, Bazzite, or Nobara. If they mainly want a PC to do work, I’d recommend Mint or Fedora.

    If they don’t want to tinker, I’d recommend Mint, Bazzite, or SteamOS, depending on what their previous choices are. If they are fine with tinkering, or at least have the option open for a particular edge case they have, then I’d recommend the other Distros.

    Look and feel would determine which desktop environment to go with. Many of the above distros have multiple options, and thankfully CachyOS supports all common DE’s.

    While not every combination of choices is supported, you can get close enough to prioritize one factor over another to get a happy compromise.

    PS, I personally wouldn’t recommend Nobara, but I’d still include it in a list with a precaution. It works, it’s my current distro. There’s a couple minor annoyances than can be mostly avoided, such as the default “Nobara” theme having global menus enabled by default. If someone was really interested in Nobara I’d try to nudge them towards CachyOS with KDE, but it’s best not to push people too hard if their heart is set