Toxic linux communities moment:

probably because lemmy's pretty small compared to places like reddit and because everyone sees the same content with the same sorting, places like reddit make a few "help" requests visible and make them feel unimportant

We should do our part in reporting unhelpful users. Especially those that recommend Arch or more advanced distros to beginners.

Anti Commercial-AI license

lol bunch of thirsty incels.

Is your wife single?

These types exist for most any technical problem. The last one is the whiny one who also slams someone with a solution they don't approve of. Even if the solution satisfies the person asking for help or perhaps because it satisfies them.

See most of these on the Arch forums

Bonus points if the lumberjack doesn't specify what logs they want or how to get them.

So you're saying that there are some asshats out there? Those are everywhere.

The open source community, and Linux community in specific mostly is a very positive and helpful bunch. I've been on IRC and fora for years and yes, yes, sometimes somebody says something negative, gee wiz.

So far the most negative types out there seem to be in this post all complaining about how negative everyone is while in reality it's not that bad

X is deprecated, you should move to Wayland.

I will, as soon as Pop!_OS moves to it.

Arch has the best documentation. Most documentation is either too dumbed down or too advanced. Arch documentation splits the difference and gives you basic information along with general context that opens your curiousity about other aspects of the system without overwhelming you.

If you pull on a thread you want to find a rope instead of getting blasted with a firehose.

I try to help an be supportive to newcomers. There's always someone who thinks shaming someone for using non free software or something like an Nvidia GPU will change their mind. There's also people who disagree with you and respond to every comment but don't offer a real solution in return. I love the people who say it works on mine without explaining what they did to make it work on their system.

He said X, not Wayland.

This has been a trope since Linux existed.

"Linux doesn't work with my hardware*

"Well, just spend hundreds or thousands on new hardware so you can run this free OS!"

https://github.com/hypnotiger/photoshop-on-linux or If you have low end device then use CS6 version of Adobe Software with Wine. Ofcourse, You can *arrrr them.

Windows 11

I saw it on c/comics and realised it could be a meme.

Very good choice going with Debian. It is simple, clean, can be as minimal or as "bloated" as you wish, and once you've worked out the kinks it will happily run for years without maintenance (except updates of course).

There's a steep learning curve because as a user you're expected to configure stuff yourself (although defaults are most of the time very sensible), but if you're willing and able to truly learn Linux and the terminal and you're familiar with your hardware, it's one of the best platforms out there.

Debian does just work and is a good choice. I think people typically have good experiences on Mint also. Ubuntu is becoming like the Windows of Linux distros, I used to use it on everything but I won't be installing it on another machine because of Snaps.

If you plan on using Linux to do gaming you might want a more up-to-date distro tho.

I know this is just adding to your problem, but I wanna add to the majority and say go with Mint. It's based on Ubuntu, which in turn is based on Debian, so most anything you can do on Debian, you can do on Mint. This is handy to know whenever you see a ".deb" file.

One of the things that makes it an easier transition from windows is that it's a lot less strict about including proprietary drivers and codecs (though apparently Debian now includes a few by default). It also includes a few more GUI tools by default, like the package update manager.

I also have found Mint's Cinnamon desktop environment to be the easiest transition from a Windows environment. KDE is also a good choice in that regard and it's what I use now, but its plethora of options can be overwhelming for new users.

The distro wars can be pretty overwhelming, but I'd say pick whatever appeals most and go with it. If you get to a point where you can't do something that you want to do, you can always come back and ask for advice and maybe switch up a different OS.

Better leave out Ubuntu if you don't want to be bothered with Snap.

Debian is a bit more "naked" per default, as a beginner maybe go with Mint.

Best advise I can give after 20+ years of distro hopping is to be ready to try a few different ones to see which one might resonate the best with you. Because not all of them will feel right. But you will find one that fits you best. It might be Debian or Ubuntu or Fedora or Suse or Mint or even Arch. (I don't run Arch BTW)

In the long run, it don't matter which distro you use - they are all Linux under their petticoats anyway. Just choose the one that works for you and makes YOU happy. And if you decide to change your distro of choice at any point for something different, that's all good too.

The only way to truly make a determination if a distro works for you is to actually try it out and use it. I've never listened to those people because they all have a favorite distro they will push on you for various reasons. I actually find Debian a breeze to use, and the vast majority of stuff meant for Ubuntu or Mint will work on fine on Debian, since it's the base of both those distros.

Split the difference and run LMDE.

The best thing you can do is separate your home and be unafraid to try something new until you know your preferences.

I used Ubuntu for years, played with other distros but always thought I'd remain there.

I tried Fedora one day because it had a newer package and now I can't find a more perfect distro.

Maybe I will in the future and die on that hill who knows.

I know exactly what you mean. I'd also prefer Debian, Mint or Fedora. Each has its weaknesses, but you got to start somewhere. Go for it, then decide for yourself. It's not that hard to switch again.

i know what you are going through, i am going to install linux on my current pc (when i worked up enough bravery... well at least i already created the boot media). I have already experience selfhosting services with Debian (in the time before Docker), but since gaming is what this PC is built for and i have a NVidia card that´s a pretty poor choice from what i gathered here.

Over the last few months i was thinking about going with Pop_OS ("i really really didn't like Gnome the last time i had to deal with it"), then Arch ("Do i really want to shoot myself in the foot? There's archinstall, but i really don't want to tinker too much on this machine..."), and now i settled for Nobara (the "gaming" Fedora so to speak, using KDE per default).

I'm now 99% sure that it should be the right one for me, but the thought of doing it makes me quite nervous.

i'm still looking for alternatives for a few windows programs; the main one i will miss dearly is Playnite. There seems to be nothing that offers the integration of all my libraries, my ROMs and emulators, automatic downloading of metadata and boxart, achievements, start scripts for games ... i could go on forever :-(

I'm out.

It's a really good, slightly bare bones initially but completely modular/customizable. If it's your first foray into Linux something like Debian, Mint or PopOS would be a slightly more comfortable starting point

i like it but i think beginners should start out with" just works" distros

For beginners, don't go with Arch. Debian or Linux Mint for normal stuff, Bazzite if you're going to game. Once you want to get to know the internals of a linux distribution, you can go for an unstable distro like Arch, Gentoo, or way lower with Linux From Scratch (LFS).

P.S Arch is a meme because it was hard to use and required the terminal, but it lost that spot to NixOS.

Anti Commercial-AI license

Arch is great, but not very beginner friendly. It might be better to start with somethin debian-based like linux mint, and install arch once you get used to using the commandline and know where to find answers to your questions etc.

I'm using Ubuntu derivatives since many years. I've looked at Arch in virtual machines and was very much lost. Even with Manjaro I didn't get along. I'm still testing EndeavourOS, which looks promising.

So to me, Arch is too much hands on for my lazy ass. However, if you like to nerd yourself into it, it's awesome (I think).

Rtfm noob

You can start with Endeavor OS KDE.. it's an arch system with Endeavor OS package managment added on top. So the Arch experience is the same.. without the pain of installation.

Plus it has some cool wallpapers.

If you're on Windows currently and it supports Hyper-V then I recommend using it to try a few distros out. I liked using Kubuntu 23 recently.

Heh, i like that take more, I interpreted it as X as in a placeholder for any subject

How should he know? He's a new user after all.

Isn't that that thing that always broke and made me feel like Linux wasn't very good for personal computers. I remember playing a game that took me hours to get running just for my computer to lock the screen and soft lock the whole computer. The lock screen captured the input after the game already captured the inputs and neither one of them worked.

Also as a kid running a script to fix screen tearing from online that happens to break the whole desktop or the weird things happening when you plugged in a second monitor.

Don't ask me how xorg works I've tried. I say good riddance, the king is dead long live the king.

No better way to learn how something works than to be forced to repair it from a broken state 😎

In my personal experience, whenever I've needed help, people have been nice and tried to help. But, my questions usually include as much context and details as I can give and even my own guess as to what's going on, if I have one. I try to make my requests for help as enticing as I can. "I didn't do anything and now my computer is broken" isn't a very interesting or scrutable request for help, so I can understand the frustration volunteers get when repeatedly faced with those kinds of questions.

I also feel like some parts of the community might be starting to recognize that, if we want Linux to become mainstream, it has to be absurdly idiot-proof and friendly to newcomers. Afterall, the vast majority of people don't want their computer to be their hobby, they just want it to facilitate other things.

Technically not a distro, but give Bazzite a try. It's probably the most hands-off gaming experience on Linux. Valve employees also make contributions to it.

I just use Debian, KDE is an option during install and I use it. However, my brain lacks wrinkles so I'm sure it could be "better" on a more purpose built gaming distro. Over the decades of on and off Linux use, I always end up on Debian because it feels like solid ground to me

Garuda. Gaming/perf focus, with lots of built-in niceties (like btrfs snapshots on upgrade, proton GE, etc)

At this point with Wayland, none of them..........

Have you tried creating a throwaway account and post a wrong answer to your own question?