Honestly, using Linux Mint lately and it's been far smoother than my previous linux attempts. Granted, there's much better tech today to help, but yeah it's been nice. My only sadness is not getting my singular Xbox App game playable on linux.
this post was submitted on 23 Jun 2025
661 points (94.2% liked)
Linux
55584 readers
1169 users here now
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
- No misinformation
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
A low place indeed when even the high seas deliver not your treasure.
Recently I was using Ubuntu and needed to recall a terminal command I had used a couple weeks prior. Luckily, my terminal commands are logged in the ~/.bash_history text file. Easy, convenient, customizable, and no AI needed!
Ctrl+r in any terminal will open up a search mode for your history.
Thank you. I was just pushing the up arrow a hundred times.
Is ubuntu still alright? I've only ever used that kernel and it was on machine that was prepped for it, would y'all say it's relatively easy to install yourself?
Ubuntu is good, actually. It has basically the widest out of the box hardware and software support of any distribution, a decent default UI and an easy installer. Its downsides are that it has a reputation as baby’s first Linux so you don’t get any hipster cred and some people don’t like that it uses snap as a package format for some things, including Firefox.
How do I dislike Ubuntu, let me count the ways:
- Desktop whiplash: Gnome, Unity, no Gnome...
- snap pushed into the default distro, long before it's a net-positive (and it's still not a net positive, IMO)
- You want this security update that somebody else published? Yeah, we want your money.
I've used Ubuntu heavily since 14.04 through 24.04... my new system installs are going Debian 12 with XFCE, and yes - I did evaluate Xubuntu, I'm actually typing this from an Xubuntu machine right now that's planned to be getting Debian if it ever needs a re-image.
Ubuntu wasn't a bad choice, still isn't a terrible choice, but if you're going to have to strip out snap by hand and deal with security updates by hand after 4-5 years and install a "niche" desktop version to get out from Gnome's rather inflexible view of things, might as well just go to Debian and be done with whatever "new deals" Canonical comes up with in the future.
Great effort and all but until we can get an .exe to run in windows to install the new system, this will not attract anybody but the 0.01%.
Yes, for us in the know it’s no biggie to get an USB stick, play with Rufus or the kind, fiddle with ”BIOS” but for the average user even the first step is just too much.
Windows can install new Windows and modify EFI stuff, and macOS can install new macOS so why can’t Linux use the same mechanisms? Especially as in the history there used to be some projects that could do this…
Best chance in decades to bring Linux to desktop and it looks like we blew it by being too accustomed to difficulty, not being united behind the effort and whatnot :(
Yo, you're giving me ideas. Maybe I can make use of my old laptop, get Windows on it (if possible), and try to do something like this. Could the average user run something through the terminal? I know PowerShell and some CMD. Or I could figure out how to GUI as well. I'd need to sketch out what such an app would do. Downloading a Linux distro would be step one. Not sure if I could make BIOS changes, though, and install. I guess with my current abilities, it'd end up being an auto ISO downloader and USB flasher at best. But I'd be down to learn and try. I'd need a basic Install Linux 101 guide, to "mimic" through a script. Could be a fun project.
Not my text but here’s what Gemini laid out, apparently projects like WubiUEFI do something like this but with caveats.
” Project: "One-Click Linux" Installer Objective: A simple .exe for non-technical users to install a full Linux distribution from Windows 10/11. The process will be fully automated after a single click.
Core Technologies & Components
- The Windows Application (.exe)
- GUI Framework: .NET (C#) to build a minimal user interface and leverage deep Windows integration.
- Disk Partitioner: Script the built-in Windows diskpart.exe utility to automatically shrink the existing Windows partition and create a new one for Linux. Requires Administrator privileges.
- Installer Preparation: Download a pre-selected Linux distribution (e.g., Linux Mint) and extract its core files.
- The Bridge from Windows to Linux
- Boot Configuration: Use Windows bcdedit.exe to create a temporary, one-time boot entry that points directly to the Linux installer, bypassing the normal Windows boot.
- Automated Installation: Generate a preseed or kickstart script. This file will provide all the answers to the Linux installer automatically (language, keyboard, and instructions to use the partition created earlier).
- The Modern Boot Solution (Post-Installation)
- Boot Manager: rEFInd. The automated Linux install will install rEFInd. It is chosen for its superior auto-detection of both Windows and Linux, and its user-friendly graphical interface. It will automatically provide a clean, icon-based menu to choose an OS on startup.
- Boot Method: EFI Stub. The Linux kernel will be launched directly by rEFInd as a bootable EFI application. This is a fast, clean, and modern method that avoids the complexity of older bootloaders. rEFInd will handle discovering the kernel and presenting it as a boot option. ”
Eh, now that I think about it, such a project would either need to take a lot of decisions for the user, or risk becoming too complex for giving the user options. I mean, I see partitioning, and I realise that's something I hadn't thought of. I assumed just an install, but what if the user wants dual boot? What distro to pick? How much space for each "boot"? Do we choose a specific DE or take the distro's main or default? So many variables. I mean, it's one thing to BAM! Ubuntu auto-installer .exe. Now, to allow for user choices… or not to? You either give options, which could be overwhelmimg to someone who might not even understand all that, or become simple and, in the process, heavily "opinionated"
Mint is really good , but a while ago I was having issues with Mint , swapped to Fedora Desktop. No more bad feelings to Linux again
fedora coo. i coo fedor
for all Ubuntu haters there is a Debian Version of Mint. And second Linux Mint is the perfekt set and forget Distro. No Tinkering for a basic PC without special Requirements.
And i love it that almost all agree that when a noob ask what Distro to choose that Linux mint is every time in the proposed Distros
Why are there Ubuntu haters? I'm on the verge of installing Linux on my desktop and have the Ubuntu pro installer on a thumb drive ready. I'm worried now...
I started out thinking to go with Mint, seems popular, but there was an instruction to verify the ISO image and it was just too complex. https://forums.linuxmint.com/viewtopic.php?t=291093
I'm already using Linux on an old laptop (Zorin) so I'm not inexperienced, but good lord that's a faff and a half. I have a life!
My advice: run a server (any server) or three, and keep your important / personal stuff there. It can be as simple as a Raspberry Pi with a big external SSD. The PC you use as a desktop environment should be easily built / configured from the base distro into whatever customizations you want, and you can either work with your personal files on the server, or mirror copies of them to your desktop system as appropriate (things like "living documents" should be primarily stored and backed up on servers, things like photo collections etc. can be stored on the server, but copied to the desktop for easy access like rotating wallpaper or whatever.)
If (when, really) any one of your systems goes down, it shouldn't be a big deal. If it's a server, restore from another server mirror / backups. If it's your desktop, install a new desktop and get your customizations off a server.
Of course this is an ideal, but keep in mind that SSDs are not "forever" devices, they do wear out and each single copy of your data will be corrupted some day. Spinning rust is even less reliable, in my experience, although I have one 2TB hard drive that has been online for more than 10 years now. It's mirrored, twice, on SSDs.
What's with all the Mint hype? I've never used it and have little desire to go back to a Ubuntu-based distro. Just curious why everyone loves it so much.
Mint is easy. Easy is good.
Even if you can configure your way through Arch to a killer custom system, is that really what you want to do every time on every computer in your life?
Getting my first computer up wasn't too bad - really no more time to configure it than anything else, and you can just toss your packages to a a text file and your dotfikes to GitHub. Didn't take long at all to get my second computer set up
I just spun up a HTPC on Debian 12+XFCE. It "wasn't too bad" but it really was more time to configure it than under Ubuntu. Totally worth it, to me. With XFCE I'm getting the desktop I want, not the desktop Gnome thinks I should have. I have the features I want, and any feature I don't want is easily banished.
But, I must admit, getting to that final further from perfect Ubuntu/Gnome configuration probably took 1/4 as many "tech flex lifts" in vanilla Ubuntu as the Debian+XFCE install took. For Debian, I had to get sudo working for my default account - which involved a "su root" and otherwise running some programs directly out of /usr/sbin - easy stuff, when you know how. I also had to configure for auto-login with more than a simple checkbox in the installer process. The XFCE launcher panel configuration is "powerful" - meaning: more hands on. Then there's an annoying XFCE trait that I finally figured out, something about when the EDID connection glitches you get spurious "Monitor Settings" dialogs popping up. I forget if it was that one, or something else, but when I was trying to configure the dialog properly, one of the tabs wasn't showing until I resized the dialog window bigger - something that seemed like it shouldn't be necessary but definitely was because I looked all over for that configuration option, didn't see it due to the "hidden" tab issue, and finally got a clue from a blog post mentioning the need to resize the window to get to it... Canonical does polish off more of those rough edges, in Gnome. Then they make you wait for snap update activity by default - I'll polish my own rough edges, thanks.
For the most part, it works well without needing too much tinkering by the user. It's the Fisher Price My First Distro.
I tried it out with a 21.3 dualboot with Windows 11 and within 2 or 3 months I hadn't gone back to Windows other than to push files over. Sure, there were a few "learning opportunities" with tweaks or weird driver issues that were because of the particular hardware I'm using, but they were manageable. At this point I'm running 22.1 only on this machine.
The nice part is that being Ubuntu-based, if I run into a problem, I can search for both the more widely-documented Ubuntu version of the issue, or look for a Mint-related version. Claude does a great job with small-to-medium troubleshooting rather than me dig through forums. It's low-risk, low-work, high-reward.
Calling is a "Fischer Price" distro is a little patronizing. I'm a seasoned Linux user and I use Mint for work because I just want something that works when my paycheck is on the line. Mint has never broken on me and always works.
I ran it for a while, and loved it. Cinnamon is sleek and feels polished. The installation is really fast and not bloated with garbage software.
Everything generally works, and the interface feels familiar.
It is Ubuntu/Debian under the hood, so compatibility with most software is good. Bleeding edge drivers may run into issues, but most of them work with a little fiddling.
It's worth a try. If nothing else toss it on a USB drive and give it a test drive.
load more comments
(5 replies)
It's fantastically simple to set up, and it's (well it's linux!) fantastically powerful out of the box.
Easy peasy, just go. No need to fiddle to get it starting, good looking, and everything is there ready to be used.
Maybe all distros are like that today but they sure wasn't (even Mint wasn't before IDK maybe 18 IMO).
It's rock solid and the desktop is very close to what people coming from Windows would expect. It's just a very good beginner distro, not necessarily something that more advanced users would choose.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
view more: next ›