I have tried Linux as a DD on and off for years but about a year ago I decided to commit to it no matter the cost. First with Mint, then Ubuntu and a few others sprinkled in briefly. Both are “mainstream” “beginner friendly” distros, right? I don’t want anything too advanced, right?

Well, ubuntu recently updated and it broke my second monitor (Ubuntu detected it but the monitor had “no signal”). After trying to fix it for a week, I decided to wipe it and reinstall. No luck. I tried a few other distros that had the same issue and I started to wonder if it was a hardware issue but I tried a Windows PC and the monitor worked no problem.

Finally, just to see what would happen I tried a distro very very different than what I’m used to: Fedora (Kinode). And not only did everything “just work” flawlessly, but it’s so much faster and more polished than I ever knew Linux to be!

Credit where it’s due, a lot of the polish is due to KDE plasma. I’d never strayed from Gnome because I’m not an expert and people recommend GNOME to Linux newbies because it’s “simple” and “customizable” but WOW is KDE SO MUCH SIMPLER AND STILL CUSTOMIZEABLE. Gnome is only “simple” in that it doesn’t allow you to do much via the GUI. With Fedora Kinode I think I needed to use the terminal maybe once during setup? With other distros I was constantly needed to use the terminal (yes its helped me learn Linux but that curve is STEEP).

The atomic updates are fantastic too. I have not crashed once in the two weeks of setup whereas before I would have a crash maybe 1-2 times per week.

I am FULLY prepared for the responses demanding to know what I did to make it crash and telling me how I was using it wrong blah blah blah but let me tell you, if you are experienced with Windows but want to learn Linux and getting frustrated by all the “beginner” distros that get recommended, do yourself a favor and try Fedora Kinode!

edit: i am DYING at the number of “you’re using it wrong” comments here. never change people.

    • MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      I dunno if I’d say any distro of Linux is really beginner friendly.

      It takes quite a bit of learning the ins and outs of operating systems before Linux makes sense in any capacity.

      If you’re just looking to run a few basic apps like discord/slack/teams/zoom, and run a browser, then sure, just about every distro can do that without trouble, and can be configured to be as “friendly” as Windows, with a few exceptions.

      But anybody who wants to do intermediate/advanced stuff with little to no prior Linux knowledge? I’m not sure any distro is much easier than others. Again, with a few exceptions.

      The exceptions are distros that are almost intentionally difficult to use, or that require a high level of competency with Linux before you can attempt to use it.

      There’s always a learning curve, that learning curve is pretty much always pretty steep.

      I’ve been using Linux for dedicated servers for a while and I don’t use Linux as a desktop environment, in no small part because despite having a fairly high level of competency with Linux, I don’t feel like I know enough to make Linux work for me instead of the other way around.

      • Kuma@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        I have always wondered what advance is when ppl say Linux is difficult when you have to do something advance. Isn’t that the same for all oses? A os no matter what os (mac, android, Windows, iOS, linux) is difficult to use the first time. It doesn’t matter witch os it is everyone will have a hard time the first time until they learn how it works. Mac for example, it was extremely hard for me to find how to get to my root folder without using the terminal and when I told a friend about it who use mac didn’t they know either… I found out by accidently by miss clicking. Android depending on brand (what you had before) can also be annoying to use the first week or weeks until you have relearned.

        Linux is the same, it isn’t more advance than windows or Mac the first time, it is all about learning how it works (most ppl build their Ikea furniture first and then read the manual) and windows and Linux in that regard is at least kinda similar because they don’t hide stuff as mac os does (you still ned a lot of knowledge to use windows too) and they are kinda alike, Mac is completely backwards in my opinion. I think everyone forgets how it was the first year they used a computer for the first time. Ppl laugh when studies shows that the younger generation do not know or do not understand the folder structure. It is all about experience and knowledge, if you know something exist then it is easier to find it.

        The biggest problem i had using Linux for the first time was finding good alternatives for programs. And learning these new programs. You don’t have to use a terminal with most distros now days but it is a very nice and fast interface to use. It is also easier for everyone to learn and use because it is less dependent on what kind of environment you are in.

        But I think we both are kinda agreeing with each other I just want to point out that all os are difficult the first time and you don’t have to make it harder than it is, linux is beginner friendly just like any other os.

    • DigitalDilemma@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Nice to hear that recommended! Slackware was the first distro I installed at home, thanks to it being included on a special cover CD from one of the magazines some time in the late 90s? Not touched it for about 20 years but glad to hear it’s still going.

      • downhomechunk@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        i discovered it around the same time, but i forget how. It’s been my only daily driver since then. I can fumble my way through a .deb distro if I have to, but slackware is my comfort zone.

        You should throw -current up on a distrohop partition and re-live your youth.

  • Max-P@lemmy.max-p.me
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    The problem with Fedora and especially the atomic versions is that when you Google “how to do X on Linux” you pretty much always get information for Ubuntu and Debian derivatives. The atomic versions have it mildly harder because now you also have to learn how immutable distros work, and you can’t just make install something from GitHub (not that it’s recommended to do so, but if you just want your WiFi to work and that’s all you could find, it’s your best option).

    It’s not as bad as it used to be thanks to Flatpak and stuff, but if you’re really a complete noob the best experience will be the one you can Google and get a working answer as easily as possible.

    Once you’re familiar and ready to upgrade then it makes sense to go to other distros like Fedora, Nobara, Bazzite, Kionite and whatnot.

    I don’t like Ubuntu, I feel like Mint is to Ubuntu what Manjaro is to Arch, Pop_OS is okay when it doesn’t uninstall your DE when installing Steam. But I still recommend those 3 to noobs because everyone knows how to get things working on those, and the guides are mostly interchangeable as well. Purely because it’s easy to search for help with those. I just tell them when you’re tired of the bugs and comfortable enough with Linux then go start distrohopping a bit to find your more permanent home.

    • woelkchen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      if you’re really a complete noob the best experience will be the one you can Google and get a working answer as easily as possible.

      Those Ubuntu “as easily as possible” answers on the web often revolve around adding random PPAs which cause breakage over time, especially the more PPAs are mixed and mashed. If anything, those easy answers from random Ubuntu forums and websites, last updated 2014, cause more harm than good.

  • boredsquirrel@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    I find it pretty problematic how Ubuntu is messed up and still used as default distro.

    Fedora has issues with always being a bit early. I prefer it a lot over buggy Kubuntu, as I use KDE, but for example now 6.1 is too early and still has bugs, while Plasma 6 was really well tested (with Rawhide, Kinoite beta and Kinoite nightly being available)

    Fedora has tons of variants and packages, and COPR is full of stuff. The forums are nice, Discourse is a great tool.

    It uses Flatpak, but adds its legally restricted repo by default.

    The traditional variants… I think apt is better. I did one dnf system upgrade to F40 and it was pretty messy.

    The rpm-ostree atomic desktops are really good, but not complete. For example GRUB is simply not updated at all. This is hopefully fixed with F41.

    Or the NVIDIA stuff, or nonfree codecs, which are all issues even more on atomic.

    So the product is not really ready to use, while rpmfusion sync issues happen multiple times a year. This is no issue on the atomic variants, but there you need to layer many packages, which causes very slow updates.

    I am also not a fan of their “GUI only” way, so you will for example never have useful common CLI tools on the atomic variants, for no reason.

    It is pretty completely vanilla, which is very nice.

    • PlasticExistence@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      I always recommend Pop_OS! for beginners. It’s IMHO a lot closer to what Ubuntu used to be, uses apt and/or flatpaks (and no snaps), has sane defaults, a good installer, a decent company behind it, nvidia drivers included and their upcoming Cosmic desktop environment looks sick.

      Also, I feel like this is a better Fedora-based distro for beginners since it’s harder to break:

      https://fedoraproject.org/atomic-desktops/silverblue/

      • boredsquirrel@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        Yes probably agree on PopOS, even though never used it. Also their DE will need a lot of time, I hipenthey dont ship it too early. I dual boot it, actually the Fedora Atomic image.

        Yes, Silverblue is the GNOME Atomic desktop but as I said it is not finished. There are many things not done.

        https://gitlab.com/fedora/ostree/sig/-/issues

        • poki@discuss.online
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          Being in active development does not mean it’s not ready. To recognize faults or things that can be improved upon and keeping track of those does not mean it’s not ready.

          By your definition, not a single distro is ready. Which, to be frank, is a perfectly fine stance to hold if the extent of this is explored and explained. However, you pose it as if Fedora Atomic is the one with that problem (implying others don’t have that issue), which is just plain false.

          • boredsquirrel@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            It is not false.

            There is a workaround for updating the bootloader, but I often use “how well does it scale” as a measurement.

            Atomic should replace traditional distros, and apart from the need for improved tooling everywhere (like easily converting random files to RPMs) it has the big issue that currently GRUB is not updated.

            This means the system is not possible to keep installed over many versions, without tweaks. This will hopefully be fixed with bootupd integration in F41.

            This means users with secureboot get issues on newer Kernels, if they installed Atomic a few versions back.

            Here is the Atomic issue tracker and I would call a few dealbreakers, while not all.

  • MXX53@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    I love Fedora. But, part of my day job is also managing linux servers. I tend to recommend things that I think are the easiest to get running. Although Fedora is super easy to get running (at least to me), I find the installation process of mint of pop os to be much easier overall. Between those two OSes, I have moved several people from windows to fulltime linux and I’m not entirely sure that the conversion would have been as successful with fedora and without more help from me during the install process.

  • fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    I’m a big fan personally. I an experimenting more with OpenSUSE’s distro including microOS but that not because of Fedora but more so I want to recommend options that are easy to scale into FOSS professionally for people too and unfortunately RedHat no longer offers that path for Fedora users.

    • olutukko@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      why would you need anymore knowledge with fedora than with mint or popos? it has simple and easy to use installer, and everything just works.

  • BubbleMonkey@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    I’m probably going to get downvoted for this but I’m a Linux noob overall…. Windows has historically been what I’ve used. Or Ubuntu. I did distrohop to antixLinux and other really super small distros, but they didn’t fix my problems and I ended up back on relatively bloaty Ubuntu for further testing and sadly it solved bout a third of my problems (the hardware is ancient enterprise shit with a whopping 4gb ram and 16 usb ports)

    I’ve been looking for a Debian based system to replace Ubuntu because I’m a noob and Debian-based is super different from the fedora.

    I’m sure fedora is great! Tons of people love it! But for a noob is can be really daunting. Especially when most Linux instructions come in three flavors “Ubuntu/debian” and 2 other things. Who knows which two. You, the advanced Linux user, probably know which two but your noob doesn’t. And doesn’t understand the difference.

    I’m not a total noob but I prefer Debian because I know a person who gets Debian and can help me. If I knew a fedora user that was actually willing to help me, I’d use that, but I’ve never met one so I’ll stick with what I know.

  • linearchaos@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    I was totally on board until centos got screwed over ( and subsequently AM2 )

    I’ll be a cold day before I touch any fedora or redhat again or even mention to another person that they should run it.

  • jimmy90@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    the ubuntu installer has always been the key difference for me specially with zfs and multi-monitor/fractional scaling/nvidia setups that it has configured well over the years where other installers leave you with a lot still to do

  • wheeldawg@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    I tried it when the first one I tried didn’t work out.

    Ctrl+C hard locked it instantly every time I pushed it. I could right-click and choose “Copy”, but pushing Ctrl-C just froze whatever image was on screen. No response at all after that. Plus it was giving me a headache trying to get Nvidia drivers installed.

    So then I moved to Pop since the correct driver was baked in, and it’s been mostly smooth since.

  • ulkesh@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    The installer is garbage in my opinion. But aside from that, the distro is probably fine.

    • 🦊 OneRedFox 🦊@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Yep, though the dpkg ecosystem also had more inertia than the rpm ecosystem did. Before Flatpak existed, pretty much everything that was packaged for Linux had a .deb file for it, but the same wasn’t true for rpm. So people who didn’t want to package shit themselves flocked to the Debian-based ecosystem. But these days we have Flatpaks and everything moved to the browser, so it doesn’t matter as much as it used to.

      • eveninghere@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        Agreed. If flatpak can continue to gain more control around GUI and hardware, I would finally be able to hop on the wagon completely.

  • Magiilaro@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    I quite often recommend the atomic flavors of Fedora to people and have it set up for a few people (my mother for example). I think atomic distributions are perfect for tech unsavory people, because they can’t really damage anything and it mimics/reproduces lots of the things they are already used from their phones.

  • cevn@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    Just finished moving all 3 of my computers to Fedora and WOW it is so good compared to ubuntu. I was missing out. Everything is working on both AMD and Nvidia, even wayland.