Linux

Windows, then Ubuntu when I started Computer Science, then Linux Mint, and I've been hopping back and forth between both but mostly Mint, then for a while also KDE Neon, then I decided to leave my comfort zone and tried Fedora, and never looked back.

I tried Fedora, Centos, Ubuntu, Debian, Slackware, Gentoo, and Mint. Finally settled on Arch Linux about 15 years ago. Never looked back.

Debian for most of my machines, rock solid and works. I've had 0 problems with Debian on any computer its downloaded on. And I personally don't need very up to date packages.

On my main computer (currently Windows due to hardware compatibility issues on Linux), I've flip flopped between Pop and Fedora depending on how much I need 3D graphics applications.

I am running Debian / KDE with a lot of KDE adjustments/configuration. Debian to ditch snaps, KDE because I can 'adjust' it to my liking.

It's been over like 10 years but it has gone something like this Windows -> Ubuntu -> Debian -> Mint -> Windows -> Ubuntu -> Solus -> Fedora -> Arch -> Manjaro -> Windows -> POP_OS -> Arch -> Manjaro

Started with OpenSUSE because it supported our Proprietary CAD software ( Choice was Redhat or SUSE ) As a bonus nVidia hosts its own repo for SUSE and OpenSUSE so no graphic issues with CAD. Then Arch because of the buzz. Manjaro EndeavorOS Ubuntu PoP!_OS Clear Linux Mint ElementaryOS Fedora NixOS

Now main machines run OpenSUSE and wifes 12 yr old laptop is NixOS.

Why? OpenSUSE is really dependable and updates are flawless, if i tinker and break something a rollback at boot is a quick fix, which is imortant since it is my daily work work-station. While you could set up btrfs and grub snapshots in other systems, I like that it comes baked in, and all the EFI/ TPM / Secure-boot stuff works with no messing around.

As for wife's machine , she is not tech savvy and Windows was too complicated for her (and so damn slow), so GNOME on NixOS (fast) is a clear workflow; and since she likes things exactly the same in order to comprehend a system , the config files make it easy to re-replicate the exact setup.

Windows -> macos -> pop os -> debian -> fedora ↓ Now

• linux mint(desktop)
• slackware(laptop)
• arch linux(Kvm/Qemu for gaming)
• Netbsd(older hardware/for fun)

SUSE -> Mageia -> Ubuntu -> Manjaro -> Mint -> Manjaro. Been on Manjaro for 4 years now.

Debian + Gnome: I don't game and have a limited wifi connection and Debian gives me stability, ease of use and I don't need to run an update more than once a week

Nowhere. I install whatever will actually get through the installation process without fucking itself up on the hardware that I'm using.

MOST of the time that ends up being Mint because the developers aren't idiots. SOMETIMES it's Ubuntu. But neither wants to install properly every time, because of course not.

Mandrake > Debian > Ubuntu > Mint & Arco Linux & MX Linux.

These three distros are the chosen ones in my case. I've been using them in my main computers for a couple of years now. It's the right mixture.

I'm probably going to stick with Arch, or maybe EndeavourOS.

I've hopped from distro to distro but I always keep coming back to Arch. The reason I use Arch is that it's my weird sweet spot of "DIY" and "it just works". It gives me a blank slate at first, but it lets me paint the canvas with whatever I want, however I want. It allows for some weird setups (like VFIO, for instance) and the wiki really helps with that. I don't really use the AUR nowadays unless it's for a package only available there, so I can't say anything about that. I use Flatpak nowadays. Some people might prefer the AUR, that's good for them! Right now it's just not for me.

If I do distro-hop again, I'll probably go for EndeavourOS just to have an Arch install that leans heavier on the "just works" side of things.

Arch. Or, rather EndeavourOS. I've lived with several distros (daily driver desktops, laptops, servers) for years: debian, Ubuntu, Gobo, gentoo, Redhat, CentOS, Arch, Artix, and EndeavourOS. Redhat was my least favorite, and EndeavourOS probably my most.

I'm currently running Endeavour on my desktop, Artix on my laptop, and vanilla Arch on several servers and ancillary devices. All of the Arches are basically the same day-to-day, except Artix; Artix is the lightest, but also the most work, and I probably wouldn't choose it again.

I like Arch because - for me - it's been stable and pain-free from dependency-hell, of which Redhat distros were the worst. I will not go back to any point release distro - rolling release has been so much better for me. The Arch wiki is the best source of Linux information on the internet, and the AUR has almost everything in it, and is easy to contribute to. PKGBUILDs are easy to write; it's hardly any more work to put one together to install something and have it managed by the package manager, than to not.

I'm interested in playing more with some of the source-based distros like void, alpine, tinycore, venom, and kiss; my experience with gentoo leads me to believe I won't be happy with any as daily drivers.

However, I'm very interested in Chimera.

I've settled on openSUSE and Fedora. All my personal systems are currently on some version of openSUSE but zypper sucks so I'm considering the move back to Fedora. Oh and my son and wife's laptops are on Fedora just cause I never moved them to openSUSE.

@tet my first computer was a ubantu mini PC I have used almost every major distro and now I use fadora because I like gnome on my laptop

Might be OT since I never was much of a distro hopper.

Got introduced to Linux with SLS, used RedHat until it became too commercial for my taste. At that time, found gentoo and stuck with it hard. It allows me to have completely custom packages fully integrated with the system package manager, that's the top killer feature for me.