I have tried to learn Linux for ages, and have experimented with installing Arch and Ubuntu. Usually something goes wrong when I try to set up a desktop environment after installing Arch in VirtualBox. KDE gave me a problem where I couldn’t log in after getting to the point where my username was displayed in a similar format to how it is for Windows. My end use case is to help keep my workflow more organized than haphazardly throwing files somewhere on my desktop or in a folder nested somewhere that I’ll just inevitably lose :(
Somehow after all this time, I feel like I actually understand less about my computer and what I need to understand regarding its facets. Is it an unrealistic goal to want to eventually run a computer with coreboot and a more cybersecurity heavy emphasis? I’m still a noob at this and any advice would be appreciated!
Even though Arch is very well documented, it’s not really accessible to newcomers. The documentation assumes that you know the basics, so if you don’t, you’re screwed. Mint, Pop! and Debian, to some extent, are much more accessible.
As an absolute noob, I can tell you this is not the case for Arch based images though. I’ve used Manjaro and now settled on Crystal Linux. Both Arch based. They are as easy as any other distro, even more than Debian.
Debian, in their philosophy, provides a pretty bare ones image, and you have to add everything yourself. They don’t even ship Flatpak for example.
Pop! Has an archaic Gnome desktop but an otherwise excellent system.
I don’t like Mint’s desktop environment, but that’s very subjective, so no cons there.
@warmaster @BestBouclettes how is pop archaic? They are based on ubuntu LTS and add their custom theme along with tiling. Being based on LTS means it isnt the latest, i dont think archaic is the best description.
Moreover they are soon coming out with their own DE replacing the current plugin for gnome. If that is distro independent, should overcome the LTS limitation.
I’m sorry if I offended you, I shouldn’t have used adjectives in my choice of words. But I didn’t mean to say POP was archaic, I wanted to say their Gnome desktop was. For me, a subjective, personal view, the difference between 42 and 44 is very noticeable. I’m using Arch, and I got really anxious seeing Ubuntu getting a newer Gnome before Arch. I want the latest DE version as soon as possible, as it vastly impacts my gaming and working experience. FSR, Fractional Scaling, VRR, HDR, Color management, etc. As soon as there’s some progress on that, I want it for yesterday.
pop has to wait for Ubuntu, who has to wait for Debian. It will never satisfy my personal needs. My only other choice would be Gentoo, another rolling release.