Compare Mint with MX



G'day James, Welcome to Linux.org

I only run Linux mint, and have never run MX, so I will watch with interest
 
I've used both of them and TBH one is no better than the other they both work good.

One is systemd and one is not.

MX is based on Debian and Linux Mint is based on Ubuntu
and Debian.

With MX Linux you have the choice at boot to choose systemd or system init.

Personally I can't tell the difference.

It's kinda like asking is Chevy better than Dodge or Ford.

Apples to oranges and lemons and pears.

Five and a half one way six another.

Create bootable media for each of them and decide which you want to use.

I know I'm not much help and probably not the answers you expected to hear.

Linux is Linux IMO and for the most just about all Linux distros work the same.

Bout the only difference are the desktop environment.

Welcome to the forum @james holmes.
 
Last edited:
Welcome to the Forum.
1714962654820.gif


I tried it a few years ago on a spare HDD...the first thing I noticed it didn't have a Formatting tool or a Disk Utility which Mint has both. Might be different now...stupid me asked on the MX Forum...let's say it's not the response you'd get here.
t3606.gif


Only you can decide which is best for you...good luck.
1714963345040.gif
 
if you are looking for tons of support....Linux Mint is the way to go
 
I have run both, they are both good distributions but compiled with some different components,
Mint is made to be an all encompassing general desktop, MX is aimed more towards the office desktop, so the components are chosen to make it a bit more secure. MX can be better on newer equipment.

In the end, the best one for you is the one you like the look and feel of, and lets you get on with your work. for a newbie doing basic home computing then Mint LMDE or Mint 21 with cinnamon desktop. Offer a good OTB experience.
 
The Duck said:
I've used both of them and TBH one is no better than the other they both work good.

One is systemd and one is not.

MX is based on Debian and Linux Mint is based on Ubuntu
and Debian.

With MX Linux you have the choice at boot to choose systemd or system init.

Personally I can't tell the difference.

It's kinda like asking is Chevy better than Dodge or Ford.

Apples to oranges and lemons and pears.

Five and a half one way six another.

Create bootable media for each of them and decide which you want to use.

I know I'm not much help and probably not the answers you expected to hear.

Linux is Linux IMO and for the most just about all Linux distros work the same.

Bout the only difference are the desktop environment.

Welcome to the forum @james holmes.
Click to expand...
Thank you Duck, for the relevant analysis.

I am setting up a "clean" new laptop ---small simple low-cost---for BTC transactions. My teacher says Mint has fewer attached programs than some, and will therefore have less chance of there being badware in there.
joh
 
james holmes said:
My teacher says Mint has fewer attached programs than some, and will therefore have less chance of there being badware in there.
joh
Click to expand...
As long as you download and use the software from the distros repository or a know reliable source you shouldn't encounter any badware leastwise I never have.
 
Thank you. It is my understanding that inherent security is a main attribute of Linux.
 
james holmes said:
It is my understanding that inherent security is a main attribute of Linux.
Click to expand...
This is true, all main distributions include a firewall, but it is your choice if you switch it on, there are several rescue applications [time shift being one of the most popular] but as I keep saying, the biggest weakness in all operating systems, is located between the seat back and keypad, Most bugs dont just appear they are let onto your machine by usually dodgy links on social media click bate post
 
james holmes said:
My teacher says Mint has fewer attached programs than some, and will therefore have less chance of there being badware in there.
Click to expand...

Now that's funny...haven't heard of badware before.
m01100.gif
 
You'd be better off with Linux Mint Cinnamon...some of us have been using it for a long time and will help with any problems you might have...good luck.
1715050897073.gif
 
james holmes said:
Can anyone who has experienced both give a comparison?

joh
Click to expand...
I have used both for quite sometime and they are both very good.

If you want something which is just going to work, Linux Mint probably shades it, but MX has some incredible features which can be useful if you need them. For example in MX Linux you are able to capture a live ISO of your system, so if you brick your machine, you can boot from this ISO (thumb drive) and it will restore everything, including settings/software etc.

The Cinnamon desktop always looks quite polished and uncluttered but the spins which are on MX are very good.

One issue with MX is that it uses SystemV which doesn't always play well with all systems or applications, although I've never had a real issue with this, but I do prefer SystemD.

This may sound odd, but I tend to enable Snaps on both of them as Flatpaks use so much disk space comparatively.

Ultimately it's personal choice, they would be my top two choices for Linux distros

Hope this helps,

Paul
 
The Duck said:
I've used both of them and TBH one is no better than the other they both work good.

One is systemd and one is not.

MX is based on Debian and Linux Mint is based on Ubuntu
and Debian.

With MX Linux you have the choice at boot to choose systemd or system init.

Personally I can't tell the difference.

It's kinda like asking is Chevy better than Dodge or Ford.

Apples to oranges and lemons and pears.

Five and a half one way six another.

Create bootable media for each of them and decide which you want to use.

I know I'm not much help and probably not the answers you expected to hear.

Linux is Linux IMO and for the most just about all Linux distros work the same.

Bout the only difference are the desktop environment.

Welcome to the forum @james holmes.
Click to expand...
Thank you kind sir. A knowledgeable fellow said that Mint has an even smaller chance of allowing malware. I used MX for a while and I liked it. I am going with Mint Cinnamon. Why? I don't really know. Now I know;; I can get good support here. Thank you all for doing that.

What about "naughtywear"? It only screws up your system a little bit.
 
Why not have them both then decide later which one is main vs Plan-B! They're half the size of Windows after all...
 
I think I am going to go with Mint. For my level, installing it will be a big deal. When that is done, I will consider your suggestion. MS designed the innards of WIn in the BIOS to be hostile to anyone not just going with their grand commercial shove up with OS trimmings.
 
I did not know that one can advertise seriously security by obscurity.
james holmes said:
MS designed the innards of WIn in the BIOS to be hostile to anyone not just going with their grand commercial shove up with OS trimmings.
Click to expand...
Nope, not only MS Windows, but Linux too is vulnerable. If you want secure OS and Linux, get Qubes.
 
Aristarchus said:
I did not know that one can advertise seriously security by obscurity.

Nope, not only MS Windows, but Linux too is vulnerable. If you want secure OS and Linux, get Qubes.
Click to expand...
If you want a secure OS disconnect the internet and lock it in a safe and dump it in the deepest spot in the ocean covered in concrete.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

Total: 391 (members: 5, guests: 386)

Latest posts

Top