AlphaObeisance
Well-Known Member
Now before the Linux Mint community comes frothing at the mouth with their torches and pitchforks; hear me out.
All of my infrastructure services run on Alma Linux. All of my game servers run on Debian. My workstation runs on Arch Linux; so I might advise you untwist your panties and hear me out.
What is it with peoples obsessions with distros? I genuinely do not understand or comprehend to any extent this delusional loyalist mindset.
I'm to the point that if someone asks me what distro they should use; I literally just tell them "yes". In all reality; I ask them one single simple question. "Do you want the bleeding edge software and applications and improvements; or do you want to set it and forget it?". If they want the former, I tell them "Choose Arch/Fedora; it doesn't matter which"; and if they go for the latter I tell them to install Debian.
And for the goofies out there, your Linux Mint is literally... Debian. Your Garuda is literally... just Arch. Your Nobara, is just Fedora. I could go on with this point but anyone who's seen the family tree of goofiness would know; that would take an eternity.
Which distro's should you install for gaming? Easy, Arch/Fedora/Debian. Pick one. In no particular order.
Which distro's should you install for the creative arts? Easy. Arch/Fedora/Debian. In no particular order.
Which distro's should you install for devops? Easy. Arch/Fedora/Debian. In no particular order.
Are we seeing a pattern here?
The only argument to be made is that you have this half of people over here who just want to install something that has everything already conveniently installed for them (Windows anyone(?)). And those who don't mind taking an extra 2-3 minutes post install to install the applications they'll actually need. One of these types of people probably doesn't even configure their firewall, the others probably tighten it tighter than the sphincter of a man who just jumped out a plane a mile high with no chute.
Regardless of which type of person you are. Any of the 3 shot caller distros can likely do what 99.9% of people want them to do provided you're competent enough to ensure you have the appropriate CPU ucode and GPU drivers installed.
I'm to the point that I literally feel like I get dumber with every conversation I read about why this distro, or that distro is so great. Like dude come on, it just feels like a vast majority of the Linux Community at large is more obsessed with distro hopping because they enjoy the experience of installing stuff; but that's really about as far as it goes. The moment their kernel update download gets botched and their next boot bricks on them; they simply blame the distro and move onto the next one rather than actually developing any understanding as to what happend; and how to fix it.
Yeah yea, I know there's going to be some niche user out there with some arbitrary use case out there just chomping at the bit to jump in here and talk about how Arch doesn't have this, or Fedora doesn't have that; but at the end of the day us power users are really the only one's who are going to be able to see this for what it is. Goofiness.
Imagine how far Linux would be if we worked more like a collective rather than a religion splitting off into 1,000 different denominations just because Joe couldn't get along with Jane.
Call me crazy. There's no shame in whatever you're using; just stop acting like it's somehow special. It's really not. Not mine. Not yours. Not anybodies.
Linux is Linux. You have the kernel, the package manager, and the init system. And, configurations I guess. That's it. Consumers, and enthusiasts. That's it.
When you install a system, you argue that the grass is greener over there because the grass was already cut for you when you moved in. When you build a system, you realize it's all the same grass and you pull out the mower. The end result is the same.
I could understand the new guys debating over this kind of stuff, because they don't know any better. But it's almost embarassing to see "veterans" make these foolish claims. It's almost as bad as hearing someone say Pop_OS! is better than Nobara because it comes with Cosmic insead of KDE, let that sink in a moment; I'll wait.
I can hear all the Debian users banging at the door screaming "STABILITY!" at the top of their lungs, but my Arch Install's been without a single crash in well over 2 years now, and only one botched kernel update which happened due to poor internet connectivity and was fixed with a simple 5 minute chroot; which would have been the case regardless of distro unless your distro is somehow immune to data corruption. Semantics I suppose.
At the end of the day. Nobody cares if your distro is essentially the walmart of distro's; pre-packaged with everything you could imagine. Or if you spend 2983456988236750 hours ricing out your sick Arch workspace.
I use Arch, Fedora, Debian....btw. (You too NixOS but that's a topic for another time.)
Distro Wars = Skill issues.
Cheers.
All of my infrastructure services run on Alma Linux. All of my game servers run on Debian. My workstation runs on Arch Linux; so I might advise you untwist your panties and hear me out.
What is it with peoples obsessions with distros? I genuinely do not understand or comprehend to any extent this delusional loyalist mindset.
I'm to the point that if someone asks me what distro they should use; I literally just tell them "yes". In all reality; I ask them one single simple question. "Do you want the bleeding edge software and applications and improvements; or do you want to set it and forget it?". If they want the former, I tell them "Choose Arch/Fedora; it doesn't matter which"; and if they go for the latter I tell them to install Debian.
And for the goofies out there, your Linux Mint is literally... Debian. Your Garuda is literally... just Arch. Your Nobara, is just Fedora. I could go on with this point but anyone who's seen the family tree of goofiness would know; that would take an eternity.
Which distro's should you install for gaming? Easy, Arch/Fedora/Debian. Pick one. In no particular order.
Which distro's should you install for the creative arts? Easy. Arch/Fedora/Debian. In no particular order.
Which distro's should you install for devops? Easy. Arch/Fedora/Debian. In no particular order.
Are we seeing a pattern here?
The only argument to be made is that you have this half of people over here who just want to install something that has everything already conveniently installed for them (Windows anyone(?)). And those who don't mind taking an extra 2-3 minutes post install to install the applications they'll actually need. One of these types of people probably doesn't even configure their firewall, the others probably tighten it tighter than the sphincter of a man who just jumped out a plane a mile high with no chute.
Regardless of which type of person you are. Any of the 3 shot caller distros can likely do what 99.9% of people want them to do provided you're competent enough to ensure you have the appropriate CPU ucode and GPU drivers installed.
I'm to the point that I literally feel like I get dumber with every conversation I read about why this distro, or that distro is so great. Like dude come on, it just feels like a vast majority of the Linux Community at large is more obsessed with distro hopping because they enjoy the experience of installing stuff; but that's really about as far as it goes. The moment their kernel update download gets botched and their next boot bricks on them; they simply blame the distro and move onto the next one rather than actually developing any understanding as to what happend; and how to fix it.
Yeah yea, I know there's going to be some niche user out there with some arbitrary use case out there just chomping at the bit to jump in here and talk about how Arch doesn't have this, or Fedora doesn't have that; but at the end of the day us power users are really the only one's who are going to be able to see this for what it is. Goofiness.
Imagine how far Linux would be if we worked more like a collective rather than a religion splitting off into 1,000 different denominations just because Joe couldn't get along with Jane.
Call me crazy. There's no shame in whatever you're using; just stop acting like it's somehow special. It's really not. Not mine. Not yours. Not anybodies.
Linux is Linux. You have the kernel, the package manager, and the init system. And, configurations I guess. That's it. Consumers, and enthusiasts. That's it.
When you install a system, you argue that the grass is greener over there because the grass was already cut for you when you moved in. When you build a system, you realize it's all the same grass and you pull out the mower. The end result is the same.
I could understand the new guys debating over this kind of stuff, because they don't know any better. But it's almost embarassing to see "veterans" make these foolish claims. It's almost as bad as hearing someone say Pop_OS! is better than Nobara because it comes with Cosmic insead of KDE, let that sink in a moment; I'll wait.
I can hear all the Debian users banging at the door screaming "STABILITY!" at the top of their lungs, but my Arch Install's been without a single crash in well over 2 years now, and only one botched kernel update which happened due to poor internet connectivity and was fixed with a simple 5 minute chroot; which would have been the case regardless of distro unless your distro is somehow immune to data corruption. Semantics I suppose.
At the end of the day. Nobody cares if your distro is essentially the walmart of distro's; pre-packaged with everything you could imagine. Or if you spend 2983456988236750 hours ricing out your sick Arch workspace.
I use Arch, Fedora, Debian....btw. (You too NixOS but that's a topic for another time.)
Distro Wars = Skill issues.
Cheers.
Last edited:
