Any other Linux users here? And has anyone fully migrated?

[koldWinter]

Starting with ubuntu for simplicity. I'm probably switching to arch at some moment tho

 

[petran79]

I'd recommend installing it first on an old pc and preferably standalone, unless Windows version is 7/8 and below.

W10 and 11 are notorious for messing Linux partitions

 

[DragonMals]

just coming in to say that even though I have Windows 11 on both of my gaming and college laptops due to incompatibility with certain software that I use 24/7 that doesn't have any other viable alternative, Linux is on pretty much anything else that isn't owned by a different family member. only one other PC has Windows 11, but the rest have PeppermintOS.

unless a family member wants to mess with arch, there will never be an arch based computer in my house, and if I get a steam deck I'm putting bazzite on there cause I've been hearing that compatibility is better

 

[Konatalzumi]

I've been on my steam deck for almost 2 months straight, it freezes up sometimes but its a really good device, especially since I just beat 2009 wolfenstein on it just yesterday

 

[rivr]

switched about a year ago. its a lot better. feels 30% faster overall compared to win10 on aged amd.
my favorite thing about it is that system crashes are now of my own doing, instead of someone else.
it also gave me that feeling of using pc for the first time again, nostalgic.

i still have my hdd with an image of my win install because i was afraid, that i might want to go back. but ill format it soon, for sure.

 

[Leon]

View attachment 134538

Starting with ubuntu for simplicity. I'm probably switching to arch at some moment tho

I'd generally suggest linux mint over ubuntu for simplicity, ubuntu has made some odd choices lately that can have knock on effects and effect your experience, though it's not like ubuntu is nessisarily terrible, it's just the closest to win 11 in it's handling of things (for better or worse).

just coming in to say that even though I have Windows 11 on both of my gaming and college laptops due to incompatibility with certain software that I use 24/7 that doesn't have any other viable alternative, Linux is on pretty much anything else that isn't owned by a different family member. only one other PC has Windows 11, but the rest have PeppermintOS.

unless a family member wants to mess with arch, there will never be an arch based computer in my house, and if I get a steam deck I'm putting bazzite on there cause I've been hearing that compatibility is better

If you don't mind me asking, why do you dislike arch?
I mean it's fine as there are legitimate pros and cons to arch but i've never seen someone outright dislike it like you do so i'm curious.

switched about a year ago. its a lot better. feels 30% faster overall compared to win10 on aged amd.
my favorite thing about it is that system crashes are now of my own doing, instead of someone else.
it also gave me that feeling of using pc for the first time again, nostalgic.

i still have my hdd with an image of my win install because i was afraid, that i might want to go back. but ill format it soon, for sure.

Just make sure the bootloader isn't managed by windows, if it is you'll end up being unable to get into either OS.

 

[DragonMals]

If you don't mind me asking, why do you dislike arch?
I mean it's fine as there are legitimate pros and cons to arch but i've never seen someone outright dislike it like you do so i'm curious.

I do not like Arch because not only did it destroy one of my PCs removing a bunch of components that the computer cannot recognize anymore (I've done enough research getting back the drivers and came out empty handed), the people who use arch are very annoying and I have to see "I use Arch btw" every single time Linux gets mentioned with a Windows problem. Sure, I get the hype behind Linux: It's miles better than WIndows (and even outperforms some gaming aspects in certain scenario with the right tools), but there can be some people that I just don't want to hear when it comes to discussion. Arch gives you full control, and so as Gentoo, but I see more people that say "I use Arch btw" than "I use Gentoo btw," because vanilla Gentoo is much harder to maintain as a Distro than Arch, and the only popular form of the latter is ChromeOS meanwhile the former you can say "I use Arch" with Manjaro, Archi Linux, EndeavorOS, and technically SteamOS.

Post automatically merged: Wednesday at 10:36 PM

I don't many other people glazing the other distros as much as Arch, and at the end of the day, it's just an opinion I have over most, even if most disagree with it. Arch users also have a second slogan for those that don't read the Arch Documentation, which is "Read the Fucking Manual." I wish to know the origins behind why they think they're the best because I could be sitting there being happy with Mint, and people will question why I'm not using Arch because it's better (more than just the cited website)

 

[Leon]

I do not like Arch because not only did it destroy one of my PCs removing a bunch of components that the computer cannot recognize anymore (I've done enough research getting back the drivers and came out empty handed), the people who use arch are very annoying and I have to see "I use Arch btw" every single time Linux gets mentioned with a Windows problem. Sure, I get the hype behind Linux: It's miles better than WIndows (and even outperforms some gaming aspects in certain scenario with the right tools), but there can be some people that I just don't want to hear when it comes to discussion. Arch gives you full control, and so as Gentoo, but I see more people that say "I use Arch btw" than "I use Gentoo btw," because vanilla Gentoo is much harder to maintain as a Distro than Arch, and the only popular form of the latter is ChromeOS meanwhile the former you can say "I use Arch" with Manjaro, Archi Linux, EndeavorOS, and technically SteamOS.

Post automatically merged: Wednesday at 10:36 PM

I don't many other people glazing the other distros as much as Arch, and at the end of the day, it's just an opinion I have over most, even if most disagree with it. Arch users also have a second slogan for those that don't read the Arch Documentation, which is "Read the Fucking Manual." I wish to know the origins behind why they think they're the best because I could be sitting there being happy with Mint, and people will question why I'm not using Arch because it's better (more than just the cited website)

So the linux community is a problem, or i should say, the small amount of people who are elitists are a problem, alot of which are in the arch forum community, however the "i use arch btw" thing is more of a meme than a badge of honor like using gentoo or slackware is.
I am honestly not sure how it's even possible for arch to remove drivers, as most drivers are in the linux kernel, this implies arch or something else damaged the kernel itself somehow.
Anyway the "i use arch btw" is similar to the "pc master race" meme, a meme, just that, some people do take it seriously but most people use it as a in joke among linux users.

Arch is technically better for gaming, but not for the reasons people like to push, arch is a rolling release, which means game fixes etc happen within about a week of release on most arch distros, arch isn't really any different than debian or fedora based distros, they just have different release schedules with debian being usually every 6 months for non security updates i believe and fedora somewhere in between the two.

When it comes to arch i never suggest using vanilla arch for anyone who isn't experienced, it's not designed for anyone who doesn't want to tinker with their linux to make it "perfect", if you use arch i usually suggest distros based on arch such as endeavor, cachy os or garuda (i myself am on garuda) because they are much harder to mess up, if you REALLY want a hard to screw up system, look for a immutable distro, this also applies to debian or fedora based distros.
Also let me be clear, arch is not for everyone, some people will not like how much it updates as sometimes it can cause programs to act up.

But yeah the "i use arch btw" thing is mostly a meme, the ones who use it seriously are idiots.

 

[DragonMals]

the "i use arch btw" thing is more of a meme

the "i use arch btw" is similar to the "pc master race" meme, a meme, just that, some people do take it seriously but most people use it as a in joke among linux users.

Sometimes there are some memes that I really like, and some that I really dislike. "I use Arch btw" is one of the latter especially since I always see it whenever someone talks shit about Windows. Sure, Windows is shit, but I don't need to know that Linux is better for everything and that one person that likes to say that they use Arch.

arch isn't really any different than debian or fedora based distros

I thought you needed to handle every single component of Arch except for the ones you've mentioned which I see a good amount of people using and whatnot. I guess there's a lot more tech entusiasts than I can tell, which is definitely a good side for me.

if you REALLY want a hard to screw up system, look for a immutable distro

Ironically, this helped me understood what Immutable Distros are such as SteamOS, Fedora's Atomic Desktops

 

[Leon]

I thought you needed to handle every single component of Arch except for the ones you've mentioned which I see a good amount of people using and whatnot. I guess there's a lot more tech entusiasts than I can tell, which is definitely a good side for me.

Basic arch's difficulty is that it installs jack for you, to the point of stupidity to a extent imo, it's entirely possible to install arch without network drivers or even i believe a display adapter, hence why i almost never suggest installing vanilla arch unless you want to challenge yourself to build your system yourself.

So 99.9% of all distros are based on 3 specific root distros, which are based on the linux kernel, the main differences between the 3 are update schedule and root package manager and keywords usually (stuff like rpm and yay, if you rarely touch the terminal you won't see this much), they are in order of update schedule from safest to fastest:

1.Debian, by far the root distro with the most spin-off distros, debian is designed for stability, even more stability than windows when microsoft isn't messing stuff up, ubuntu, linux mint, and the gaming based pika os are based on debian, debian as i said before has the slowest update schedule sometimes not updating core components for months.

2.Fedora, fedora is technically a spin off of red hat enterprise for the non enterprise market but became bigger than red hat itself over time, it's something of a middle ground on the update schedule between debian and arch, distros most known from the fedora pipeline are nobara and bazzite, fedora has the smallest amount of distro spins.

3.Arch, arch is bleeding edge and all that entails, it usually updates integral files like gpu drivers and even the linux kernel within a week of release, arch has the second biggest amount of spin off distros, notable ones are all basically easier to install and use versions of arch (usually with software centers to make it even easier), endeavor os, gaming based garuda linux and catch all current favorite of the gaming community cachy os, i believe the more work based omarchy is also based on arch.
I will say this outright, never install base arch unless you want to build basically a arch based distro from kind of scratch, there are definitely reasons to do it if you know exactly what your doing, but for most users who want a working system it's not worth it unless you want to learn or challenge yourself.

Now there are other distros not based off the big 3, like open mandriva, gentoo and slackware, but that's a different topic and of the 3 i think the spins of these don't even make up .1% of the linux distro market.

 

[ThirteeTooBeets]

Windows has become so ass in recent years that I'm very tempted to migrate, a friend of mine did and keeps insisting I do too

 

[A G E N T 特工]

my other pc have zorin OS, while my main gaming pc will stay with windows 10 as long as possible (at lest 5~10 years), when the time comes and steam discontinue support for the OS I believe in that time the user base of Linux will be large enough for most of the 3rd party programs like anti cheat makers and creative programs to support it, and I will make the jump there, but if I start a new pc build today, I will use Linux on it

 

[petran79]

my other pc have zorin OS, while my main gaming pc will stay with windows 10 as long as possible (at lest 5~10 years), when the time comes and steam discontinue support for the OS I believe in that time the user base of Linux will be large enough for most of the 3rd party programs like anti cheat makers and creative programs to support it, and I will make the jump there, but if I start a new pc build today, I will use Linux on it

issue is that Nvidia will drop driver support for all gpus in 2026, unless there is a method to bypass detection during installation

 

[A G E N T 特工]

issue is that Nvidia will drop driver support for all gpus in 2026, unless there is a method to bypass detection during installation

I'm sure there will be a way to bypass it when the time comes, but TBH I don't remember the last time I updated my GPU driver, as long as it works, I don't need to change a thing

 

[FateLanegod]

Don’t get me wrong, but I think newbies struggle too much to choose their first distro.
I’d suggest just pick any which you think looks cool and works out of the box for you on your hardware. And simply use it. If you face issues or get bored, try another one (or newer one).

For example my first one was Knoppix if anybody still knows what was that. It was one of the early LiveCD, packed with everything fresh KDE, kernel, firmware drivers, tons of software, and it worked well even on most “high-end” PC with CDROM drive of that time. And the boot up screen and desktop looked like from sci-fi movie to me. You could browse files from win disks and save everything to a thumb flash drive or floppy, heh. That was a big thing for those who was afraid to mess up their windoze. Although had to reinstall Win9x/2k once in few months anyway

After you get some experience, the distro vendor will not that important to you anymore, you probably will have just some preferences. This is especially true if you get into modern Linux eco system. You may use appimages, snaps, flatpacks software package sources and even docker images (more advanced stuff) which all distro agnostic. Today I use only browser, file manager and terminal coming from my OS. And media player too.

 

[DragonMals]

Basic arch's difficulty is that it installs jack for you, to the point of stupidity to a extent imo, it's entirely possible to install arch without network drivers or even i believe a display adapter, hence why i almost never suggest installing vanilla arch unless you want to challenge yourself to build your system yourself.

3.Arch, arch is bleeding edge and all that entails, it usually updates integral files like gpu drivers and even the linux kernel within a week of release, arch has the second biggest amount of spin off distros, notable ones are all basically easier to install and use versions of arch (usually with software centers to make it even easier), endeavor os, gaming based garuda linux and catch all current favorite of the gaming community cachy os, i believe the more work based omarchy is also based on arch.
I will say this outright, never install base arch unless you want to build basically a arch based distro from kind of scratch, there are definitely reasons to do it if you know exactly what your doing, but for most users who want a working system it's not worth it unless you want to learn or challenge yourself.

I will definitely say after you've gave me a bit of what Arch is about, I'll appreciate it since I didn't know most of Arch's main issues can be negated if you're using a distro that has most of the stuff covered for you, such as SteamOS. IIRC SteamOS, despite using Arch is also Immutable, which I'm wondering how the hell is that distro even possible to have something like that. maybe that would be the better solution to my NVIDIA Laptop, but I still wouldn't use Linux on there generally speaking due to Paraec no having hosting capabilities on there. I've tried Sunshine/Moonlight and it does work! it just doesn't have its UI and other things to be exactly as straightforward and easy to learn as Parsec.

2.Fedora, fedora is technically a spin off of red hat enterprise for the non enterprise market but became bigger than red hat itself over time, it's something of a middle ground on the update schedule between debian and arch, distros most known from the fedora pipeline are nobara and bazzite, fedora has the smallest amount of distro spins.

Of all the distro kinds there is, the RHEL lineup has to be the best of the bunch. the perfect middle ground for being consistent whilst staying as stable as it can be. i also see it as a spiritual successor to Debian for how similar the dnf package manager is to apt but done MUCH better than it.

 

[Leon]

I will definitely say after you've gave me a bit of what Arch is about, I'll appreciate it since I didn't know most of Arch's main issues can be negated if you're using a distro that has most of the stuff covered for you, such as SteamOS. IIRC SteamOS, despite using Arch is also Immutable, which I'm wondering how the hell is that distro even possible to have something like that. maybe that would be the better solution to my NVIDIA Laptop, but I still wouldn't use Linux on there generally speaking due to Paraec no having hosting capabilities on there. I've tried Sunshine/Moonlight and it does work! it just doesn't have its UI and other things to be exactly as straightforward and easy to learn as Parsec.

Of all the distro kinds there is, the RHEL lineup has to be the best of the bunch. the perfect middle ground for being consistent whilst staying as stable as it can be. i also see it as a spiritual successor to Debian for how similar the dnf package manager is to apt but done MUCH better than it.

The main problem with steam os currently is it's built around amd gpu's, making nvidia support not that great.

As for fedora, not sure i agree with that stance, but fedora does kinda have to work since red hat enterprise which fedora is based on, is a paid os that MUST work or red hat loses money.

 

[DragonMals]

The main problem with steam os currently is it's built around amd gpu's, making nvidia support not that great.

As for fedora, not sure i agree with that stance, but fedora does kinda have to work since red hat enterprise which fedora is based on, is a paid os that MUST work or red hat loses money.

Yeah I see what you mean. I've only meant that because I had better success getting Fedora to run on my stuff than literally any other distro. it's also the one that I know that convinces me to learn more about the terminal more

 

[fbnaulin]

I come from Ubuntu 5.10 (Breezy Badger). Then, used Linux Mint for many years til now I moved to CachyOS.

I love Linux, and I’m very happy to see interest and usage growing.

 

[Leon]

Well it's not like fedora is bad or anything, my own personal gripes with red hat aside it's fully functional.

 

[irkella irkella]

Well it's not like fedora is bad or anything, my own personal gripes with red hat aside it's fully functional.

I jumped around between quite a few distros before settling on Fedora with cachyos kernel for my gaming rig, but I do really like vanilla Debian as well.

The 'just work' nature of things is more attractive to me now, since I don't have as much time to mess around and tinker as I used to.

 

[FateLanegod]

Regarding GPU support, Intel and AMD are on excellent level, while the other one manufacturer was always pain in ass (citing Linus: “F@(k you, nvidia!”). The same for motherboard chipsets actually.

All Open Source drivers (kernel modules) work mostly well nowadays, but for some cutting edge cards or cheap crappy silicon chips you may need not only fresh kernel, but firmware blobs too, which might come separately. Check your prospective distro wiki page or forums or simply do web search about your chip model support status. Sometimes those fancy ubuntu or arch forks simply cannot keep up or don’t care or even lacking of any support details.

 

[pinetreeneedle56]

Me, me, me! (Not a power user or developer, but still!)
I am barely new to linux, but even before Windows went down the gutter, I jumped ship.

One thing I don't particularly like about Linux, that the whole development ecosystem hasn't created a solution for, is how unstable the kernel is. Even for distros that are not rolling release, something seems to break every so often that requires a "getting your hands dirty" fix.
It's been an issue for the several years I've used it now, so atleast since I switched, it hasn't been addressed.
One of my friends was turned away from giving the OS a chance because his installation seemed to suffer a cascading series of breakage for zero apparent reason.

The Wayland and Rust rewrite projects could not be completed soon enough...

Post automatically merged: Friday at 2:25 AM

Oh, and the difficult/maintanance Arch requires definitely seems blown out of proportion.
That title seems to belong to Gentoo, instead.

 

[jankusanagi jankusanagi]

[...] is how unstable the kernel is.

What?

 

[pinetreeneedle56]

What?

As in, every update feels like it breaks functionality, or is bug ridden.