Thx in advice.
linux mint
Seconded. I’ve been using it for years because it just works, but if I want to try to
break shitdo things myself I can.Thirded. It just works. Even deployed to elderly relatives with wifi printers with no issues.
More specifically, Linux Mint Debian Edition. Canonical has been very weird, I would get the debian based branch
The one and only objectively best answer, imo.
I researched this question for a laptop to sell on eBay. I tried Pop OS and Mint and choose Mint.
It seems that Mint may be the most popular distro for older Linux laptops sold on eBay.
That’s exactly what I did with my old Core2Duo laptop because I couldn’t in good conscience sell it with factory-loaded Win-Vista LOL.
If somebody with knowhow gets it, they can put whatever they want on it. If someone without? They get a solid OS that gets security updates. Win-win.
Pop_OS or Linux Mint. Both just work. The Atomic idea is nice, but still too soon for complete beginners or the lazy (not a pejorative).
Mint, it just works.
EndeavorOs, just works, like Mint, but Arch Based so much better
Well, I just use arch, btw. 💁🏻♀️
Not exactly the hassle free experience op is looking for
Yea, that is why I recommended Mint in top comment.
With the statement about Arch I wanted to say, that I have no experience with endeavourOS 😂😅
Edit after reading endeavourOS web page: what is even the difference between endeavourOS vs. Installing arch using the archinstall python script and using yay as package manager?
Only the installation is harder for Arch, EndeavorOS is easier to use then Mint, and installation is same thanks to the gui installer.
The difference between Arch with archinstall vs Endeavor is still the ease of installation.
So, the only difference to arch is, that you have a gui for installation? In that case, I like archinstall script more. Mostly because I think it’s faster.
What you think and what is the reality to casual users are two different things
Could you explain a bit about what makes it better?
Until it doesn’t lol
If you need secure boot on current (like intel gen 10+), Fedora Workstation. If you don’t need secure boot, Linux Mint.
Fedora has the easiest way to make secure boot just work, it will even dual boot fine on the same disk although you should still backup the m$ partition if you actually need it. Fedora can do secure boot even with Nvidia.
Ubuntu can do some of the secure boot stuff like Fedora does, and there is the advantage of the stable kernel if you have Nvidia.
Note that “stable” as a label has nothing to do with its intuitive meaning like alpha/beta/testing/crashing etc. It is a term for servers and people that want to run very specific setups that will not require human intervention on embedded devices and servers. If you want to game or use the latest sw “stable” might be a pain. However, if what you are running is not kept up to date with the latest packages and libraries, a stable release may be the only way to run your stuff.
Overall these are the biggest factors on current hardware; secure boot yes/no, and up-to-date software needs yes/no.
Linux Mint works fine with secure boot
Which of these would you suggest: Debian, Ubuntu, Pop!_OS or Linux Mint?
Mint is easy mode, but has no secure boot shim implemented. It makes gaming accessible.
Pop is made for System76 and does some stuff funny IMO, and is like Mint with no secure boot if you are not running 76’s proprietary bootloader on their hardware
Ubuntu is easy but has its quirks (most are fixed by Mint which is based on Debian/Ubuntu)
Debian is hard mode and is an advanced distro. There are a ton of tools that are unique to Debian. It is used mostly for people running their own servers and custom purpose machines from home or work. It is also the primary distro for hacking hardware and reverse engineering stuff that has no other way to create Linux kernel support.
Every distro has some things that they are specialized for. You can do almost anything with any of them, but it will depend on your skill level. Something to keep in mind here is that Linux is not a consumerism branding contest. We are not choosing our frivolous teams. This is the place where everyone can learn. While beginners and users are welcome, you will find many aspects of Linux are the study and thesis projects for many computer science students. All levels are present here. This is why so many options exist.
Afaik, Mint does support secure boot nowadays.
All distros “support” SB because SB is not part of Linux and it requires setting your own SB keys. That is outside of easy scope. The question is if they support the m$ signed shim and what system is used to achieve this. Fed uses Anaconda (unrelated to Python container system). It is something unique to Fedora as far as I know. Linux refuses to support SB because SB is a scheme to steal hardware ownership. The standard implementation is only a suggestion and bootloaders are not required to give you access to the custom keys implementation in the specification. Microsoft controls the shim for SB. It is extremely decisive and controversial.
“Linux” doesn’t support secure boot because it’s distributed as source rather than binaries. As far as I’m aware Linux actually has special handling for secure boot (there’s a kernel mode where it refuses to load unsigned drivers).
Also, I think as part of the secure boot spec, implementations are required to let you enroll your own keys. Whether that’s still true or if it even works on many motherboards is another question.
Anyway Unbuntu (and thus Mint) should take care of the signing for you. Although when I tried it didn’t work, but that could have because I use a fancy gamer kernel rather than the default.
The mechanism for not loading signed drivers is outside of the kernel. In Fedora, this is handled by Anaconda.
The last time I checked a few months ago, only Fedora and Ubuntu participate in the Microsoft 3rd party key signing arrangement. This shim signed aspect is done at the final stage of distro packaging. There is no upstream so it is not a Debian or downstream thing.
There can only be the one kernel they sign. This is a problem for Nvidia because Nvidia modules are unsigned upstream. They only do their binary BS and supply kernel source code that is different from that binary. We must build that source to make a module but this is unsigned. The only way to have Nvidia drivers under a shim is to build a system that can shim into the gap between boot and kernel init. This must build the Nvidia module from source in a way that is totally secure so that it may never be modified inside Linux or used as an entry point to add a root kit to the UEFI bootloader. Once the Nvidia module is built, then Linux is initialized. This is the only way to have secure boot functioning unless the user manually adds custom keys to the bootloader and signs their own kernel modules. Most distros leave this aspect of the system entirely up to the end user because it is not part of Linux. Most distros tell you to turn off secure boot. The bootloader is the largest attack surface in modern computers.
The secure boot specification is only a set of guidelines and not a required implementation. Indeed, my laptop does not have the functionality implemented to enable this, thus the reason I know all of this so well. There is still another way that I have not explored, but it is generally less known and lesser documented. There is a tool called Keytool that can boot directly into UEFI. Supposedly it can manually alter the keys outside of the bootloader implemented features set. The only documentation I have ever come across for Keytool is in the gentoo handbook, but gentoo documentation assumes a very high level of competence.
Very well put.
I’d go with Mint. They have thought out 99% of the things a user might ask for in a DE, along some basic admin configuration stuff you might need. It’s the best out of the box distro.
My all-time favourite is Kubuntu.
Installation and use is as easy as it gets.
My vote is Linux Mint. I had installed it on a family members laptop and have been going strong for years without fault.
What do you think of Ubuntu compared to Mint?
I came here to +1 Mint
I’ve installed it on 3 laptops for different family groups and had 0 problems with either the laptops or the family using them
To clarify that - with Ubuntu the UI was just a tiny step too different (than Win XP) for them to feel comfortable using… with Mint, no problems.
The laptops vary, but 1 is ~12 yr old, another is new (well, 3 yr old now), but Mint was installed to dual-boot Win 10 when new.
I use Arch btw
I think Ubuntu is a solid contender for sure. I had a couple bad experiences with some updates (nothing significant) which didn’t really inspire confidence for me to be able to set it up once and never need any real maintenance on my behalf.
Don’t get me wrong, if I was using the laptop and it had Ubuntu I’d be ok with it because I’m comfortable with Linux. But for a set and (mostly) forget install, I chose Mint.
deleted by creator
Fedora
Fedora requires adding rpm-fusion to enable proprietary apps like Steam or hardware acceleration for codecs like h264. It’s a great distro besides that, and I sincerely hope they’ll just accept the legal risk like Ubuntu does.
It’s super straightforward to enable, it prompts you to at start up. I think so anyway.
Yeah I agree they should just accept the risk
except with nvidia. gets stuck on black screen and did not understand the instructions i found in the interwebs.
Damn that sucks. Had lots of good luck with fedora, but I’ve never had Nvidia
Linux Mint Cinnamon
Linux mint cinnamon simplex users unite!
I love how simple it is to install and use.
I really wanted to like Mint cinnamon but it didn’t like my dual screen+built in screen on my pc case.
It would try and smush the display for the pc case screen into the monitor displays pushing everything over and making mouse clicks widely inaccurate (the click was half a screens away from the actual cursor).
Only ever had that issue on Mint
Everytime I want a distro that just works I just roll with Linux Mint.
Being one of the most popular distro if something goes wrong is really easy to find how to fix it .
I think your best bet for this is one of the spinoffs of enterprise Linux: fedora or openSUSE. both are very solid ootb, and have starting configurations that are generally good.
The microos or silverblue variants respectively are really promising as well, but still have some caveats.
Fedora is not an enterprise Linux spinoff, it is an upstream to an enterprise Linux distribution. Neither of those support proprietary video codecs and other potentially patent encumbered pieces out of the box, with some work for proprietary drivers too.
Is that so? I can remember a option on install to download proprietary stuff. I think that means codecs?
I am not saying that you are wrong just asking if you are sure.
That option is in Ubuntu and works as you expect it to.
Fedora has an option to enable third party repositories. Those are extremely limited.
Enabling all of rpmfusion or packman on opensuse is still work and even more work in the immutable distributions.
I’ve used both, and the only third party repo I’ve enabled was tailscale. I’ve not had any issue with needing codecs in anything I’ve Installed through the discover app. I’ll admit that I don’t have an Nvidia card, so I don’t know how good support is ootb there (though iirc, at least openSUSE has a separate installer that include Nvidia drivers)
You likely have and not noticed. Hardware rendering even with the Intel iGPU requires them. Just means things are not as performant or efficient as they could be, and more power usage, as your cpu is doing the rendering instead.
For example: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Firefox_Hardware_acceleration#Configure_VA-API_Video_decoding_on_AMD (this references Firefox but applies to most video players)
The patents have routinely caused headaches. For years (2017) neither one could play mp3s and only recently have they gotten support for proper subpixel rendering. The mp3 (and dvd) thing was a big reason people used Ubuntu instead for a long time.
Sure, but in both cases it installs the flatpak version that distributes the codecs with the runtime.
Although, now that I say this, I did install the flathub repo on fedora, which does slightly undermine my point
Mint, it’s not the shiniest toy but it really does just work
For me it is Fedora
If you have Nvidia, pop os has all that built in. My go-to is usually popos, or mint
I have an Nvidia GPU and have had a few issues with crashes on Mint even after manually installing the latest drivers. Is PopOS noticeably more stable? Have you by chance played Helldivers on it?
Also it seems like it’s pretty tightly coupled with Gnome and tweaks, is it still adventageous if you use, say, KDE?
I didn’t play helldiver’s, but other games were stable on pop os.
What do you think about Ubuntu over Mint?
Mint is Ubuntu without snaps.
👍👍
Fedora atomic GNOME or KDE.
You don’t mess with the system at all. If you look for something specific, you may find something here https://universal-blue.org/images/ .
The setup is a few commands, on ublue its a few less.
Do live images not exist anymore? Pick a distro, burn an iso to a USB drive and boot it. See if you like it.
You’re just going to get a bunch of personal preferences with such an open ended question.
And for 100% of distros someone will come and say: “except for this where you gotta do this and that but then it works fine”.
That’s the problem I’m looking for something it just works, stable WO errors with updates and simple, just to get things done and not messing entire weeks fixing and searching solutions online for something what didn’t work correctly.
That’s just the nature of linux though. Most common distros run without issue. But people have such a wide variety of hardware and software needs that someone somewhere will tell you they had issues with that distro.
Much easier to boot them and get a feel for the one you like, you are not likely to have an issue, and if you do it will take minutes to fix on a common distro.
I use fedora for the nice OOTB experience, but if there’s issues with parts of the hardware - I try Ubuntu. And if it works, I just install it.
Life’s too short to deal with hardware blobs.
If anything shouldn’t Ubuntu not work? Fedora runs the regular kernel while Ubuntu runs the Ubuntu kernel
In my experience, ubuntu seems to support a few more wifi cards OOTB. And for me that is an essential feature - I don’t want to deal with getting the network up without access to the internet. I still experience Fedora to be smoother as a desktop though.
