Linux

My distro is not the best, I would rather say it is the least bad for me, because I don't like any.

Mint. It just works and Cinnamon is a good DE (ui design peaked in the Windows XP days). Plus you also get all the software built and tested for Ubuntu without the bullshit of using Ubuntu.

For my server I use NixOS, because having one unified configuration is so nice.

With Guix you have reproducibility, freedom, good docs and peace of mind, also when configuring things more deeply. You also have a powerful programming language (Scheme / Lisp) with which to define your system config as well as your dotfiles. This is my insight after years of GNU/Linux usage. I run Guix on laptops, desktops and servers, and I never have configuration drift, as well as the benefit that I have a self documenting system.

https://codeberg.org/jjba23/sss

Why my distro (pop!_os) is the best? Well it's probably not, but here's why I went with it:

• ubuntu based, so lots of applicable tech support online
• looks nice out of the box (imo)
• comes with nvidia drivers. Not a major point cause they aren't hard to get, but it was one of the things I considered when I unintentionally ended up with with nvidia
• tiling (the big one imo)

Aand that's kinda it :3.. at the moment it's kinda behind all the other stuff cause they're working on the new COSMIC DE, which im hoping is gonna be an upgrade to the GNOME with extensions the current version has

As with others, I love Debian Stable.

Most packages have sane defaults, and it's so stable. It's true that it sometimes means older software versions, but there's also something to be said for behavior staying the same for two years at a time.

If hardware support is an issue, using the backports repo is really easy - I've been using it on my laptop for almost a year with no problems that don't exist on other distros. If you really need the shiniest new application, Flatpak isn't that bad.

It also feels in a nice position - not so corporate as to not give a darn about its community, but with enough funding and backing the important stuff gets maintained.

Arch. I tried other distros and always came back to Arch. Other distros are very bloated and honestly I can't be bothered with removing them manually. I also love the AUR and the wiki.

Another interesting distro was NixOS, but that is a bit of a pain in the ass to learn.

For newbies, Fedora KDE Plasma edition or Mint Cinnamon is my recommendation. Kinoite is Fedora KDE Plasma edition but immutable for the ones that keep breaking the system because they keep following some absurd guide online for whatever.

OpenSUSE because rolling release and no IBM. Never used it though.

Currently I use Mint. It works but it's not the best.

I use debian cause it just works.

I was a Nix user (more specifically, nix-darwin user) but after being away from the computer for like one year (to study for the university entrance exam), I completely forgot how to use it and resulted in erasing the computer. Nix/NixOS is fun, but it was too complicated for me.

EndeavourOS is the best because.

It's currently on my system and said system hasn't burst into flames yet, so I'm too lazy to change it.

OpenSUSE Tumbleweed/Slowroll

Tumbleweed is the only bleeding-edge rolling release distribution that just works and never fails and is super easy to install and manage without any expertise. And it is massively underrated and forgotten for no good reason.

All Tumbleweed packages go through extensive and to this day unrivaled automatic system testing that ensures no package is ever gonna bork itself or your system.

If you're still worried about stability, there is Slowroll - currently testing, but in my experience very stable distribution. It makes rolling release updates...a bit slower, so that they're only pushed after Tumbleweed users absolutely ensure everything is great and stable (not that it's ever otherwise). It does the same job as Manjaro, but this time around it actually works without a hitch.

Both deliver great experience and will suit novice users.

IDGAF if it's the best (mint), it was easy to install, easy to transition to from Windows, and in 6 months hasn't given me any trouble. I just wanna use my computer.

Bazzite.

Super easy install and setup. Ready to start installing games at first boot. Just a wonderful OS to use.

My Debian is the best for my work laptop
My Arch is the best for my private laptop
My Asahi is the best so that I don't have to deal with f*cling macos crap

Aeon desktop is the best indeed:

• Crazy fast install.
• System configuration is done on the first boot.
• Supports ignition and combustion.
• The install USB can become a $HOME backup if you re-install.
• Full disk encryption by default and mandatory.
• Latest GNOME, looks clean and pretty.
• Rolling.
• Immutable, with Distrobox by default.

As far as desktop Linux goes, I don't see why I would use anything else atm. Give it a try!

Mint Cinnamon. All my hardware works, and it can do the few things I require my work PC to do. It even remembers things like my default audio device - something Ubuntu refused to do for years.

Arch. I think when people say "bloat" they don't mean it in the traditional sense of the word. Most people are installing plasma or gnome and pulling all the "bloat" that comes with them. To me at least it's more that no one is deciding what they think you're likely to need/do, and overall that makes the system feel much more "predictable". Less likely to work against what I'm trying to do.

Ignore all the comments about Arch being hard to install or "not for beginners". That view is outdated. When I first installed Arch when you had to follow the wiki and install via the chroot method. Now it's dead simple to install with the script and running it isn't any more difficult than any other distro.

Mainly though it's because of the AUR.

Linux Mint because it's extremely simple and has caused me no issues for over a year. It's the best distribution to get someone who is afraid to switch from Windows or MacOS to understand that using Linux can be just as easy.

Nix, it just works, built in rollback sane defaults, super customization. Super easy to package for

EndeavorOS. It runs smooth, i dont get errors, all my games work, the taskbar and notifications work like I would expect them too. Switching from Windows 2 months ago, I cycled through a few distros but they all were giving something up until i found EoS.

Imo, the best one is the one that fits the user's needs the best. Though it sounds like a non-answer, distros are usually tailored for specific needs, so not necessarily the features or lack thereof from one distro disregard another.

Debian (testing) is most suitable for me. If there were a universally best distro, all the others would cease to exist...

It isn't made by a for-profit company and thus doesn't have "features" I don't want.

It pays attention to software freedom, though it isn't so restrictive about it that it doesn't work with my hardware.

It was very easy to install only the things I wanted and needed.

I've discovered that I don't much care which distro I'm using, it's the DE that matters most. I have Fedora GNOME, Debian GNOME, and openSUSE GNOME running on different machines. I can't really tell much difference until I enter the command line or package manager, and even then, it's the front end of the command that changes while the backend stays mostly the same. Flatpak has made the difference between distros even fewer.

NixOS makes me feel so safe making low-level changes to Linux and making sure that my work laptop, gaming desktop, and personal laptop all have the exact same shit on them and I'm gonna use them the exact same way.

I wish that nixlang was decoupled from the concept of a build system bc it's such a great DAG config DSL and I can think of so many cooler uses for it but I just don't have time to focus on it.

slackware the og linux distro. super stable, sane package management etc. i've wanted to try void/arch/gentoo/crux for a pretty long time but still haven't because this just works perfectly

Ubuntu.

Why? - I guess I'm too lazy for distro hopping now :(

Besides, this was the 1st Linux distro I tried back in 2005. After the usual ditro hopping phase was over, I settled on it; somehow (irrespective of snap and other controversies) I feel at home.

NixOS.

• I have access to more packages than with any other package manager.
• everything to get my setup in the exact state I want is in my config, which is 90% useable on any other distro thanks to home manager
• My config is all in one place and easy to share
• If I ever break something, I can always roll back
• I don't need Docker

NixOS. I've gotten so used to the declarative nature of NixOS, that I simply cannot go back to a "normal" distro anymore.

Fedora is quite unremarkable, no issues of late. Or ever, for that matter. It's glorious.

Garuda - all the benefits of arch with an easy installer. And it's prettier (in my opinion) than EndeavorOS. Gaming is pretty great.

Gentoo works best for me because I'm a control freak. It lets me tune my system in any way I want, and I don't mind leaving my computer on while I'm asleep so that it can compile its way through libreoffice, webkit, and a couple of browsers. Plus, based on complaints I hear from people using other distros, Portage beats other package managers in every way except speed.

This doesn't mean that it's best for everyone, mind you, just that it's best for me.

A bit of tinkering. Thoughts?

Obligatory "There is not a single distro that's the absolute best for each and every one." disclaimer aside, my personal favorite is definitely secureblue for being a hardened-by-default distro that adheres to the ~~'immutable'~~ reprovisionable, anti-hysteresis paradigm while enjoying a healthy stream of improvements pushed out by an active group of contributors.

It's not.

Mac OS is my favorite Linux distro.

OpenSUSE tumbleweed: Up-to-date, unbreakable due to Btrfs+snapper, very secure defaults (firewall), based in Germany. It works perfectly on my Thinkpad, so I couldn't ask for better.

I just want to learn more about what are the differences between distros, so that they will be better or worse? Are all the distros having the same GNU/Linux kernel so that if I replace all the Arch userland files into Debian's, the system will become Debian?

Mint Cinnamon.

It's easy, stable and gets out of my way.

I haven't seen the need to dostro hop for years.

having tried many distros over the years, Arch (and most derivatives) is best for me
pacman is the best i've used, packages are very up to date, and it's pretty easy to troubleshoot with the enormous amount of info on the wiki and elsewhere

Arch.

Do I need to justify myself any further?