3d ago

wHiCh DiStRo ShOuLd I uSe FoR gAmInG??

You're viewing a single thread.

215 comments

This is crazy. You shouldn’t use Ubuntu for anything desktop related. There’s nothing vanilla about vanilla Ubuntu.
(Custom Gnome extensions, patches on top of Gnome, custom sandbox packages that don’t always work, custom apt that refuses to install the real packages in place of snaps, paywalled security patches, should I keep going?)
- Except I have no trouble replacing snaps. I only replace them when there is a need. I always add gnome extensions to mine. I like a little extra and I get it easily with ubuntu. If you are a individual user you can get the ESM updates for free and I do.
  When one of the other distros demonstrates anything that I cant get with ubuntu I will move on. Until then I'll keep using it because it keeps working.
  
  When one of the other distros demonstrates anything that I cant get with ubuntu I will move on. Until then I'll keep using it because it keeps working.
  You can’t get vanilla Gnome on Ubuntu. There are tons of other distros that will give you vanilla Gnome (they don’t put any of their own patches on top of Gnome).
  But I think you were pretty clear that you don’t want vanilla Gnome, so if Ubuntu’s working for you, more power to you. I just wouldn’t recommend it to anyone new to Linux.
  
  I don't like vanilla gnome. Like I said the first thing I do with any debian installation I work on is install extensions.
  
  Extensions are one thing. Even if a distro comes with some Gnome extensions, you can just disable them. Ubuntu puts custom patches on the Gnome packages they ship. Those can’t be disabled, and they could potentially interfere with extensions that don’t expect them to be there. That’s my problem with Ubuntu’s approach to Gnome.
  I understand that you don’t like vanilla Gnome, but I still wouldn’t recommend Ubuntu to anyone, especially noobs, as a desktop OS, because of the myriad issues with Canonical’s approach to modifying the source of the packages they ship.
  It’s the same reason if anyone reports a bug to any of my software, and they say it happens on Ubuntu, I’ll disregard it unless they can replicate it on an OS that doesn’t patch their packages that way. Canonical is responsible for fixing the bugs their patches cause, and they’ve added tons of extra triage work to devs who have to determine whether Canonical fucked something up or there’s actually an issue with their code.
  
  I totally get you don't like it but once again you are not giving me any reason why what you prefer is somehow better.
  
  I’ve given you quite a few reasons, you just don’t care.
  Let me put this really simply. Canonical fucks shit up with their patches. Users experience this as buggy software. Users file bug reports to the software. The bugs aren’t valid because the problem is with Canonical’s mess of patches. That is bad for me as the dev, because I have to triage that bug and determine that it’s Ubuntu, not my software. That is bad for you as the user, because software that works perfectly fine on any other system doesn’t work on yours. This is also bad for you because the devs that build the software you use have to waste their time tracking down Ubuntu bugs, instead of spending their time improving the software you use.
  Maybe you don’t consider this a problem, because you’re used to how buggy Ubuntu is, or maybe you don’t use any software that Ubuntu has fucked up, but that is a problem that people experience, and if you don’t see that, that’s a you problem.
  Also, I specifically didn’t mention “what I prefer”, because it doesn’t matter. Canonical is the only big Linux company that does this to an extent that devs waste their time on it. Any other big name distro is better than Ubuntu.
  
  Your right I don't care. Fanatics care about things no one else does. I don't have many bugs with ubuntu and any that I do are usually trivial. You keep saying its bad but its not my experience. My experience started with Slackware. I still have a Slackware box that I still compile my own kernel on from time to time to keep in the know on kernel changes. I'm not by any metric an amateur. I'm sure some of these bugs seem unique and are a major problem for you.
  I've tried mint and wasted my time with arch. I'm installed them all. I've even created my own. None of them have ever brought anything game changing to the table. I've seen bugs with every distro. Somehow to you these bugs are worse. I can clearly see they are similar to other distros and the bugs they have.
  In reference to what you prefer. Its clear you don't prefer ubuntu and you have continually mentioned it. So don't pretend you don't have a preference. Disguising it as some general disdain on how canonical operates doesn't negate its clearly your preference. You will not change my mind and I don't want to change yours. You seem like you just can't take I don't care about how you see it any other way than personally.
  Other linux companies? Of which I really only know of three in total all do things that people don't like
  Red Hat(IBM) killed centos and I moved all my servers over to straight debian the week after their announcement. I didn't like it but I didn't foam at the mouth about it. They also clamped down on their sources so fedora is going to become increasingly obscure. Kind of like SCO became. They wont die that death but I look at Red Hat as a dead end.
  SUSE has never been a distro I've used. No reason really. I always had other options. Their decisions were business ones and therefore unpopular to some.
  Canonical is doing it their way and they are doing a good job. You can't deny that but Its clear you don't like it. I would really like you to stop generalizing and give me a specific bug they have out of the box that isn't tied to some specific hardware. I don't pay for ESM but I use it since I only have two Ubuntu machines that I use personally.
  In the unlikely event anyone else bothers to read this. I will speak to you what I've said elsewhere in this thread. Find something you like and stick with it and don't let someone elses problem become yours.
  
  My partner is a luddite and needs help setting up a new cell phone, and had been avoiding linux because he thought it was just for programmers. I put Ubuntu on his machine back in '10, and he hasn't run into problems with it because he only uses Firefox and LibreOffice.
  
  I do a lot on this machine. The last three days I've been compiling openwrt for a extreme ap. They are a cloud ap and eol. I've compiled a firmware for them and put in a custom initial config so they will be in ap mode and will work when they are plugged up at a router with no config. We have thirty of them at work and are donating them. I am almost done since I'm changing the ssid and passwords for each of them. I do a lot with ubuntu and it just works. I have little time for people that insist that its somehow garbage.
  
  I must have mistakenly given the impression that I’m a fanatic, or that I care about what other users (like yourself) use. I really don’t. To the extent that I care, it’s only because Ubuntu is a headache to me, even though I don’t use it. My problem with this conversation is that you keep asking (or more accurately, challenging) me to provide you with specific details, then when I do, you pretend like I’m trying to convince you not to use Ubuntu.
  I’ve given you the reasons why I and other software developers don’t like Ubuntu and what you can get from other distros that you can’t get from Ubuntu, because you asked me to provide those details. I completely understand why those details don’t matter to you, because I’m assuming you’ve not experienced their negative effects. You asked me for details, and I figured that was because you wanted to learn someone else’s perspective. I apologize for the misunderstanding.
  
  So no details just a vague dislike.
  Take any topic about anything and you can find people who dislike it. You have given no details and only offered generalizations while never mentioning any other distros problems. Absolutely nothing I could go look at and confirm. I'm sure it seem definitive to you but the rest of us want something other than opinion. Specific doesn't mean the same thing to the rest of us.
  Good day.
  
  Serious question. Have you read anything I’ve said?
- Kubuntu LTS (--minimal-install; no snap fuckery from the start) has been wonderful.
  
  You could also just use Fedora KDE
  
  The only thing that stops me from recommending Fedora and OpenSUSE more often is that there are still so many niche packages that are only offered as .deb (like Unreal Engine). Being forced to use unofficial community Flatpaks makes me uncomfortable and new converts aren't going to want to hear how they can compile something themselves, assuming that's an option.
  
  You should not install random package files. That is a bad idea in general and creates instability and introduces security problems.

215 comments