Categories
Post
In my previous article, I gave a list of criteria to help choose a Linux distribution. In this post, I summarize how distributions pass or fail these tests and reveal my preference.
Some distributions that have been on my radar in the last few years, in alphabetical order:
- Alpine
- Arch
- Debian
- elementary OS
- Fedora
- Gentoo
- Linux Lite
- Linux Mint
- MX Linux
- openSUSE
- Peppermint
- Puppy Linux
- Raspberry Pi Desktop (not to be confused with Raspberry Pi OS)
- Slackware
- Ubuntu
- Zorin
I. Is there a distribution recommended for use, or bundled, with the hardware?
Most of the computers I get tend to be special hardware, which makes selecting an operating system simpler. My present computer, however, is an HP ProDesk 400 G4 SFF, a typical desktop PC. It has no internal wifi and requires special drivers for the external adapter, but this is a problem common to Linux distributions.
II. Is the distribution is likely to endure?
Most of the distributions on my list have been around, but some are less stable or mainstream than others. elementary OS's lead developers had a dramatic falling out. Linux Lite, Peppermint OS, and Raspberry Pi Desktop are obscure and don't seem to offer enough advantages over the distributions they're based on to justify use. Zorin is popular and has unique features, but is primarily developed by the eponymous Zorin brothers, and is at risk should anything significant change in their lives.
III. What is software support like?
Most of these distributions are decent here. Debian and its derivatives are the easiest to find packages for, but the others also have good support. The main loser is Alpine, which uses musl instead of glibc, making it incompatible with most Linux binaries.
IV. How easy is it to set up, use, and/or maintain it?
Arch, Slackware, and Gentoo have reputations for being difficult. I have set up Arch before, and the new archinstall tool expedites the process, but Arch updates can break things, and whenever that happens, it is the user's problem. Alpine is 'some assembly required', but I have set it up several times. Debian is easier than Alpine. The rest are similar to or slightly easier than Debian.
V. What type of applications do you expect the distro to come with after a fresh install?
As I mentioned in my previous article, I prefer minimal installs, and the harder distributions cater to that. Debian and Arch hit the spot in this respect. Raspberry Pi Desktop is also light. On the other hand, Ubuntu MATE and Fedora's MATE spin come with customizations and preinstalled software that I am not crazy about. MX Linux is lightweight, but it does add to Debian, perhaps unnecessarily.
VI. Do you like it (whether the product, or the brand, or the people who put it out) more?
This is the real 'decision point'. The majority of the software I use has been picked by everything else being disqualified.
- elementary OS has release names that are named after mythological gods. To be fair, our days of the week, months, and planets have the same problem, but it feels off to me in this case. I disagree with other choices of its current owner/lead developer. Finally, it is centered around a GNOME-like desktop environment; I don't like GNOME.
- I once endorsed Linux Mint, but discovered that the founder of the project, at one point in time, vehemently wrote against the Israeli government. The project may be bigger than one man, and he did apologize for using the distribution as a platform for his political views, but I feel this is cause to look elsewhere.
- MX Linux is partly derived from the antiX community, which is associated with radical political positions.
- openSUSE has a lizard logo in its favor, but it also has the 'wicked' network manager. Such names suffice to deter me from software (for example, I avoid KDE on account of its 'powerdevil' and 'bluedevil').
- Puppy has a mixed record. I like the branding, but there are specific Puppies that have issues like other options here. Since Puppies are based on other distros, they can also inherit issues.
- Slackware is associated with the mock religion of the 'Church of the SubGenius'.
You might have guessed my choice after reading these points and noticing what was, or wasn't, mentioned. I feel that Debian fits the bill. Running through the questions again:
I. Is there a distribution recommended for use, or bundled, with the hardware?
Although my machine doesn't have many special requirements, Debian supports almost every type of hardware out there.
II. Is the distribution is likely to endure?
It is the second-oldest existing Linux distribution, and has a large community. It is likely that more Linux distributions than not are based on Debian.
III. What is software support like?
Debian has massive software repositories. Third-party Linux programs typically offer .deb support.
IV. How easy is it to set up, use, and/or maintain it?
Debian isn't as easy as some, but it is easy enough, and it's getting better. Debian's installer now includes non-free firmware. As far as stability and maintenance, popular consensus is that Debian Stable is 'rock-solid'.
V. What type of applications do you expect the distro to come with after a fresh install?
It is simple to get a minimal Debian system, and to install the software you want after the fact.
VI. Do you like it (whether the product, or the brand, or the people who put it out) more?
Neither Debian nor its community have any kinks that I am aware of.
When I was a kid using Mac OS 8.6 in 1998, I felt Debian was representative of 'default' or 'official' Linux. My understanding of Linux has evolved, but I have never aged out of that childhood impression, and it is upstream for half of the Linux world.
I like stable things, things that have survived a long time, and things that other people consider 'boring' or 'passé', and Debian is all of those.
Debian flew on the Space Shuttle Columbia, and NASA has been known to use it since.
All in all, Debian is a classic, and...