I can set everything up from two config files. If I want to set up something on my laptop I got working on my desktop it's just cut and paste.
Guess my distro
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
I can set everything up from two config files. If I want to set up something on my laptop I got working on my desktop it's just cut and paste.
Guess my distro
Garuda - because like endeavor it's arch for lazy people, plus I got sold on the gaming edition by how much I like the theme and the latest drivers. But that's just what got me to try it, what sold me on it is when I had a vm of it that ran out of hdd space mid kernel update. I shut it down to expand the drive, booted it back up and no kernels present. Fiddling around in grub in a panic made me realize snappertools auto snapshots btrfs before updating. I think only once in my life (out of dozens of tries) has Microsoft's restorepoints actually worked for me. Booting to the snapshot was effortless, clicking through to recover to that snapshot was a breeze. I rebooted again just to make sure it was working and it did. Re-updated and I was back in action.
That experience made me love garuda. I highly recommend snappertools+btrfs from now on and use it whenever I can. Yes, preventative tools and warnings would have stopped it from happening, but you can't stop everything, and it's a comfort to have.
I use Kubuntu. I like the KDE desktop and I like a Debian based OS. If someone is going to make their software for Linux, it will almost certainly be available at least for Debian. If, say you want it for Arch, you need to wait for someone to put it in the AUR or build it yourself.
Debian because it just works. I am interested in trying NixOS though.
I dual boot Fedora KDE and Arch.
I've used Mint before and I've little to no qualms with it, but I wanted to move away from X-11, which has no GUI isolation. Hence the switch to Fedora, which has a smooth Wayland experience and also happens to have SELinux out-of-the-box.
I use Mint because I use lots of small project software that tends to only have packages for Debian/Ubuntu. Mint also works very well with an NVIDIA card. I've tried other distros but they fail to work well with nvidia.
When I get a new AMD laptop I want to try Vanilla OS as apparently it can use any package format but is also immutable which I like. I just hope they have the KDE Plasma edition out by then because I really don't enjoy Gnome
Pop OS. Don't use much of its custom features since I have installed sway on top of it and did some custom edits, was thinking of switching to another distro but they announced COSMIC, which looks very cool. Why not stick with the distro that could have the best experience with it?
I agree, only release schedule really matters, package managers are easy to learn.. I don't think the AUR is that special either, I've always found everything I needed no matter the distro, but maybe I don't have exotic requirements.
I'm fine with most distros, though I don't bother with the fast rolling ones anymore, I did for a few years but I don't see the point for me. I'm happy with Fedora or an Ubuntu derivative and major updates are one command which is trouble free unless you've changed something in a non-standard way.
Now using Pop 24.04 as it's on a stable base and I code COSMIC stuff, oh and they update kernel/nvidia/mesa on a regular basis (I use hybrid Gfx, Intel iGPU and NV offload). I'll probably stick with PopOS or Fedora COSMIC spin/copr moving forward.
Use case for me is coding and gaming.
Ubuntu because it was the first distro (after Mint and PopOS) to boot on my eclectic hardware.
Vanilla Arch, because for me it's the easiest to use and everything just works and never any had instability issue like other distros I tried
Started with Linux Mint. Added the KDE desktop. And I'm done. This distro does everything I want.
Artix as my daily driver because of the AUR, and I like runit. I no longer feel the need to distro hop; I'm happy here.
I used a bunch of distributions (like Gentoo, Arch, Slackware, Debian etc.). Then I created a distribution-like system with LFS -BLFS and now using itbecause I want to see how Linux works in a detailed way. It's a little painful but it's not a problem if you are a masochist person who doesn't have to do anything else.
Bazzite. Just works really Convenient updates, and more straightforward features
I started using Linux with Arch as first distro Fedora KDE and Arch would be my other picks
I've used Debian, Ubuntu, Mint, and Manjaro. All viable options. I'm currently using Mint on my daily driver, Ubuntu on my HTPCs, and Debian on my servers.
I liked the rolling release aspect of Manjaro, but I missed having a system that works with DEB files. I'm not a fan of flatpak/snap/appimage due to the size (I've often had to use slower internet connections). I settled on Mint for my daily driver because it has great and easy compatibility for my hardware (specifically an Nvidia GPU). It worked okay on Manjaro as well, but I've found it easier to select and switch between GPU drivers on Mint. And Cinnamon is my favorite DE, and that's sort of "native" to Mint.
I'm using vanilla Ubuntu on my HTPCs because I have Proton VPN on them, and it's the only setup I've found that doesn't have issues with the stupid keyring thing. And Proton VPN's app only really natively supports Ubuntu. The computers only ever use a web browser, so the distro otherwise doesn't matter that much.
I'm using Debian on my servers because it's the distro I'm most familiar with, especially without a GUI. Plus it'll run until the hardware fails, maybe a little longer.
Arch, because it has what I want for gaming. Also its simple, lots of help in forums and community driven. Im not too big on rolling, but it's really stable and works.
I have distro hopped a bit, used fedora, ubuntu, debian, and manjora. Stopped on arch as, I like my xfce set up with arch.
KISS - keep it stupid simple or simple stupid.
Home: Arch, because I'm a lazy ass who likes the AUR.
Work: Ubuntu, because the laptop they gave me came with it
Servers: I don't have a particular distro I use for all my servers, it depends on what's my frame of mind when setting the server up. But I'm considering learning NixOS for this use case.
Depends on the use case.
I use Nobara on my gaming rig because I wanted up-to-date packages without being on the cutting edge like Arch. And I also wanted all the lower level gaming optimizations without having to set it all up manually. Plus, KDE is soooooo nice.
Debian on my servers because I want extreme stability with a community-driven distro.
Linux Mint on my personal laptops, because I like having the good things from Ubuntu without all the junk. Plus the Cinnamon desktop environment has been rock stable for me. It's my goto workhorse distro. If I don't need something with a specialized or specific use case, I throw Mint on.
Arch on my old junker devices that I don't use much because I like making them run super fast and look sexy and testing out different WM's and DE's.
Void on my junkers that I actually want to use frequently because it's super performant and light on resources without needing to be built manually like Arch.
Ubuntu server if I am feeling stanky and lazy and just need something quick for a testing VM or container host in my home lab.
I've been on Mint with Cinnamon for about 5 years across desktops, laptops, and home server
I had to update a machine with a version of Mint that was EoL this year, so I just upgraded through several major versions in a row with no issues
It was interesting seeing how much more polished each upgrade process was
Laziness. I used Ubuntu, then tried a few distros based on it, and Linux Mint worked well enough out of the box.
I have a few issues with it, but i have easy workarounds so that's good enough for me.
Fedora… it took way to long to figure out how to remove all the software I didn’t need / want and still have a functional system. I will not subject myself to that pain again 🙂
I started off with ubuntu in 2009, switched to mint some years later, because of the cinnamon desktop environment which I liked better than the new ubuntu unity flavour.
This year I switched to manjaro with kde plasma. Just for fun honestly.
Arch on desktop/laptop because I'm very comfortable with it, and I can set it up the way I like.
Debian on servers because it's stable and nearly everything has a package available, or at least instructions for building.
Same as OP, but I'm not likely to change them out. I've tried a lot of distros over the years and this is what works best for me.
I look at distros as a base to make changes from. I can make my distro into whatever i want but its going to take varying amounts of effort depending on which distro I start with.
I choose Nobara because i really liked fedora and I wanted a fedora base but with someone(eggy) keeping up with the latest gaming tweaks and adding them. Ive been using it for 2+ years and so far so good.
After tried Alpine, NixOS, Archlinux...finally Im on MX linux because this is a no brain distro and I'm tired to search how to make things to work.
Arch. I'm addicted to updating packages and Arch helps me stay sane.
I like apt and is great stability for servers and unstable branch for desktops/laptops/Legion GO. (Debian with Xanmod).
Ran Ubuntu and Ubuntu server first then switched to desktop fedora and liked it so I switched all my servers to fedora. Tried TrueNas Scale in the past and disliked it except for SMB shares. Also have an unraid server but hate it.
I guess I’m pretty superficial about just liking the base fedora DE. Idk beyond that.
I run a headless Ubuntu server and Mint as my daily driver. I tried Pop OS first, which was great, other than I hated the task bar and had some problems with some apps. I also tried Kubuntu which gave me problem after problem. Mint made everything easy.
Eh, it worked for me the best back when I was new to Linux, and I've never tried anything that was better, just different since then.
I went through the usual Ubuntu experiment, but their baked in DE at the time was just unpleasant. Tried manjaro? I think, it's hard to recall if that was before or after that initial flurry of trying things out. But there were a half dozen that got suggested back on the Linux for noobs subreddit when win10 came along amd I was noping out.
Mint did the trick. Cinnamon as a DE did what I wanted, how I wanted it. It came with the stuff I needed to get started, and the repo had the stuff I wanted without having to add anything. It worked with all my hardware without jumping through hoops.
I've tried other stuff and like I said, nothing better, just different, so why screw around?
Tbh, that's also how I feel about pretty much everything I tried though. If I had run into one of the others that happened to "fit" the same way back then, I'd likely still be with it because there's really not a ton of difference in day to day use between any of them. The de matters more in that regard, imo.
TuxedoOS because my so-called "Linux-Laptop" turned out to not run mainline Linux very smoothly. But I hate that fact that it's Ubuntu-based.
I'd use Debian, Arch or dabble with Void if I could on my laptop, my servers run Debian or Alma.