Skip Navigation
357 comments
  • Both are important. I can't tell you how many times I've had to resort to containers, VMs, or compiling from source, just because some application decided to only provide packages for Arch or Debian.

  • I'll go one further and say choosing applications is more important than choosing a Desktop Environment.

    I'm typing this message on Firefox. I installed it (and updated it) with Debian's package management system. I clicked on a button on an XFCE panel to open it. But in terms of the time spent interacting with things on my computer I'm using the applications far more than anything else.

  • I'm not sure if it is, but I don't see it as a hot take. And it sounds reasonable, specially when some distros offer different "flavours" out-of-the-box, and offer you the option of different DEs before you even installed it.

    • It's certainly not a hot take. Every "which distro should I try thread" is just a discussion of the different DEs out there. I would like to hear about different package managers. I always seem happiest with apt, and I don't know why.

    • Fair. But "Lukewarm take" just doesn't have the same punch.

  • Yeah... but if the packagers dont test it, or ship "stable" KDE Plasma 5.27 which will simply not get most bugfixes (Debian, MX Linux and many more will have these issues for 4 years!) its actually important what Distro you choose.

    It is not if

    • your Desktop relies on Xorg garbage which is "stable" and will not evolve
    • your Desktop is minimal and Distros orient their schedule on it (GNOME)

    This doesnt apply to

    • KDE
    • Cosmic
    • Hyprland, Sway, Wayfire
    • LXQt getting Wayland support probably
  • Literally the only reason I use Zorin is because I am too computer illiterate to put the stuff i like about its desktop environment in a more lightweight distro or on Qubes

357 comments