Linux

67467 readers

133 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 7 years ago

MODERATORS

nooter692@lemmy.ml

AgreeableLandscape@lemmy.ml

MarcellusDrum@lemmy.ml

cypherpunks@lemmy.ml

cyclohexane@lemmy.ml

d3Xt3r@lemmy.nz

Which distros are visually and/or have user interfaces/experiential sensibillities/idioms akin to Windows/MacOS/("pure") Linux as distinct from the other 2 major OSs? (lemmy.world)

submitted 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) by cheese_greater@lemmy.world to c/linux@lemmy.ml

34 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I realize this is impressionistic but for the sake of the conceit:

"Mac" flavored (PopOS, ZorinOS?)

"Windows" flavored (Mint?)

"Linux" flavored (Fedora?)

Edit: was not aware 1) Distro & 2) Desktop Environment are seperate/distinct. Good to learn

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] curbstickle@anarchist.nexus 6 points 4 days ago (1 children)

My workstations are Debian, my laptops are a mix of Debian and Arch, same with test hardware.

They all look the same - KDE as my desktop environment, no generic software added at install, just adding what I want. If you were to use any one of them purely from the GUI (KDE), I doubt you'd know which was which without checking version info.

Linux is a kernel. A desktop environment is the GUI. The distro is packaging.

The difference between distributions is predominantly what is packaged up, the tool used to install/update, and an overarching philosophy on those tools.

Debian is about being stable. This means more dated packages, but running into issues from an update is (mostly) not even a question when running the stable branch. Amazing for workstations and older hardware IMO.

Arch updates constantly. Updates can introduce breaking changes, even minor ones, which can interrupt workflow. It also means the latest and greatest features are right there and ready quickly. I like arch for testing and making use of recent hardware that may not have support elsewhere yet.

You could also build entirely from source, use a downstream from Debian like Mint (Debian Edition) or Kubuntu, or downstream of Arch like SteamOS or EndeavourOS. Downstream distributions add more opinion under a more particular approach to their upstream counterparts. For some its to make the system easier to install (EndeavourOS vs Arch), add more recent features (Kubuntu vs Debian), or to make something incredibly specialized (SteamOS, formerly based on Debian and now based in Arch, highly focused on gaming).

The only thing thats "pure" Linux is the kernel. Everything else comes down to purpose and preference.

[–] cheese_greater@lemmy.world 2 points 4 days ago

This is very informative, thanks for taking the time to help me get up to speed :)