You must log in or register to comment.
I only ever recommend Red Star OS
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://piped.video/UPzIz9v0EIY
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
Amen. Even Arch shouldn’t be recommended to new, non-techie users. Much less stuff like NixOS, which has horrendous documentation.
As someone who uses Arch (btw) I would never recommend it for a beginner.
Really. Most people just want their computer to do Internety things. Some officey things, and then show them a film.
If someone doesn’t get those pretty easy the first try they are going to head back to their corporate masters.
Honestly most of us really just need the same thing. I have run a number of different distros, and yeah Arch is really fun. The thing is I realized I just need the basics and I want free time. So I came full circle and went back to Mint. Is it one of the most vanilla flavors of Linux? Absolutely, but it usually just works and I appreciate that now in my life.
Is it one of the most vanilla flavors of Linux? Absolutely
it’s really not though. Distros like Debian, Fedora, and Slackware are a lot more vanilla. Linux Mint develops a lot of their own tools and rices the desktop a lot.
I have always used the Xfce DE so mine is pretty vanilla. I have no idea what cinnamon is like.
I don’t know if maybe it is a difference in definitions. I would say those are simpler and very stable. But they are harder to use as a daily driver’s personal computer. I have never used slackware or Fedora, but Debian is so held back to keep it stable Often you have to go find software that is newer to get it to be able to deal with everybody else. It seems much more of a server than a daily. But IDK it has been a while since I looked at it.
Mint has good moderation updates, tends to play better with proprietary codec, Nvidia, etc. without having to mess around with it too much. At the same time at least for me it’s very stable.
When I think of a vanilla distros I think of the ones that ship packages straight from upstream with no or minimal changes. Mint is a good distro, but I wouldn’t call it vanilla. Also Mint would have to be mint flavored not vanilla :P
I get what you’re saying. I guess I’m using vanilla in a slightly different context. I was more talking about the end user experience and how much you needed to know first how much it did itself. To me it is the changes to packets that makes mint vanilla it is somebody else doing the work for you.
As for the flavoring I think you got me there
As someone who started in the deep end back in 2001 (My first distro was a Slackware derivative) I actually enjoyed the satisfaction of trying to get XFree86 to work and seeing all the available command line tools. Of course this was back in the Windows 98 days so I was already used to going into MS-DOS mode. My first computer was a Commodore 64 as well so didn’t get mollycoddled at all when learning to use a computer.
no u! 😢
