I’ve been working and testing to switch my main PC (used for work like audio recording, music, and general multimedia) and have been playing with Ubuntu Studio on my laptop. Loving it so far but I keep seeing people talk about CachyOS, Bazzite, or the new Debian Trixie.
I’m having trouble finding what’s really different about all these distros aside from how they look or slight changes in how they do things (I know Ubuntu Studio has a low latency kernel which seems important for what I need to do). Is there a big difference? Like, if I go with Ubuntu Studio am I gonna end up wiping everything and installing CachyOS or Bazzite or something in a month because it’s better? Or are all these distros basically the same thing with a different look and feel and as long as I choose one that gets regular updates, it doesn’t matter fundamentally?
I’m trying to grasp the Linux concept but being a Windows user my whole life I’m struggling to ‘get it’. Instead of trying to understand in the contex of Windows or Mac, is a better comparison Apple/Android? Like iPhones would be similar to both Mac and Windows (you don’t get to choose much) and Android would be Linux (I know it’s built on it haha) and it’s really just a bunch of different options to do the same thing?
Really they all work the same as long as they’re based on the same OS. I’ve done a lot of distro hopping and the only real difference I’ve seen is the desktop environment, package managers(sometimes), and pre-installed applications.
Even then, all of these can be changed. I would suggest picking a distro that best suits your needs by default and then add what you need from there.
I personally have been really happy with Linux Mint.
Been using Linux for 20+ years, and I’ve found it is the Desktop Environment that matters the most to me. It is the part with which I have daily contact. I have a PC running Debian, another running Fedora, a laptop with openSUSE, all with the same DE. My wife runs PCLOS with a different DE on her laptop, so I instantly revert to the CL rather than spend time searching for stuff.
I’m in the same boat as OP. I just don’t understand why one distro over another. I guess the next questions would be - what made you choose Debian for one PC and Fedora for the other? Do you find that openSUSE works better on a laptop than other distros? If the experience is the same, why not have them all the same distro? Do you just choose a distro on a whim? Roll a dice? Flip a coin?
These days the things that really differentiate distros are: installer, default desktop environment, packaging, packages.
As someone completely new and stupid it feels like the desktop environment is the only difference I will ever notice. I was just about to move to bazzite and poke around until I realised the example and what I was picturing were just gnome.
At least I know im stupid.
IMO distros are just “how little work do I need to do before I get this to work the way I like?” You can make any distro work practically the same if you want it to.
From a new users perspective, a lot of the main ones will probably feel very similar and the main difference you’d notice is stability and compatibility. Don’t overwhelm yourself with choices, just choose a easy to use, high user base, well supported distro to start on (Fedora, Ubuntu, Mint) and if you don’t like it move to something else later
Appreciate it. I’ve decided to stick with Ubuntu Studio as long as I can duplicate my workflow before I make the switch. Think I got into my own head and indecision took over haha.
IMO, coming from the systems administration side of Linux, the most significant difference was package management and availability.
RedHat and clones were very conservative and focused on services like web, database, etc. With IBM purchasing RHEL, many switched to Ubuntu. Ubuntu is also favored by devs because the packages were more up to date.
You’re on the right track. Linux technically refers to the kernel, the low-level core of the operating system that everything else interacts with and is built on top of. Distros are just collections of components that have been standardized by some group or company.
Linux Mint is heavily customized Ubuntu with a different DE and all of Connonical’s stuff removed. Nobara is a gaming-focused distro built on Fedora with a bunch of kernel modifications and pre-installed software to help games run better. CatchyOS is just Arch but with a really friendly installer that allows less advanced users to still enjoy many of the heavy customizations and cutting-edge software of Arch, etc etc.
Think of it like an engine. You can use the same engine in a bunch of different vehicles. You can also make modifications to the engine itself, but it will still essentially be the same engine.
The #1 rule for new Linux users, especially ones who aren’t interested in becoming power users or tinkering with their OS, is if you’re happy with your distro, stick with it.
There’s no objective “correct” distro. The best distro for you is the distro that works and you feel comfortable with.
Lots of new users become worried that they are missing out on some major improvement in their experience of Linux or feel like they picked the “wrong” distro because some random user dissed it. Don’t pay attention to that, if your distro does everything you need it to do and you enjoy using it, there’s no reason to go looking for something better.
Now of course, there’s nothing wrong with checking out other distros, and if you are somebody who likes to tinker with your setup and doesn’t mind risking breaking things sometimes, then by all means, distro hop away. Almost all distros have a “live boot” option, which allows you to test the OS off of a flash drive without having to install it on your computer. It’s a great way to quickly get the look and feel for a new distro without having to commit.
And of course, there are tons of Linux YouTubers who do reviews of distros, so you can watch those to also get an idea of the different options out there.
Because of the nature of FOSS and the linux ecosystem, you can make most distros look and feel just like any other, so that’s always an option too.
This helps a lot, thank you. I’ve been feeling overwhelmed about making sure I pick the best distro and there’s a lot of info bombardment. Additionally, I love this stuff so I know in a couple months there’s a good chance I’ll want to use another distro and I don’t want to wipe everything again haha.
I use my PC for work, freelance audio production, voiceover, music, etc. I’ve been testing Ubuntu Studio on my laptop and it seems to be going ok so far (learning curve and lack of software aside) but I keep seeing people shoot down Ubuntu. Everyone seems to be talking about Bazzite and CachyOS but honestly I’m getting the impression they don’t use Linux for much more than just gaming.
It all feels a little gate-keepy in ways and I got overwhelmed haha. Think I’ll just keep chipping away with Ubuntu Studio and see if it’ll do the trick for my main PC. Thanks again.
I used Ubuntu Studio many years ago when I was going through an electronica phase lol. It worked fine for me.
Don’t sweat it, there will always be the hot new distros on the block. Right now it’s Bazzite, CatchyOS, and NixOS, back in the day there was Garuda, Arco Linux, Bunsen, MX Linux, and a ton of others. Some are still around, some are long gone. Doesn’t mean they are bad distros, many of them are/were great, but don’t choose a distro just because everybody is talking about it.
Plus, as you get more experience with Linux, the differences matter less and less. There are only a handful of package managers, and unless you have some very specific technical requirements, they all do the same thing and work the same way.
“apt install firefox” becomes “yum install firefox”, or “pacman -S firefox” it’s all pretty much the same under the hood.
And if you use KDE Plasma on different distros, the Discover store works the same across distros, same with any other GUI package installer.
If you keep getting better and get into home lab building or just have several different computers, you might end up using a bunch or distros at the same time on different machines.
Right now across all my physical computers and virtual machines in my home lab, I currently have 9 different distros installed on various machines. Different distros for different purposes.
My general #JustWorks laptops and VMs use Linux Mint, my hardcore gaming rig uses Nobara, my test junker laptops run Debian 13, Void Linux, and Arch for testing random software and messing around. For my Docker containers, I run Debian 12 as the base, for my Minecraft server, Ubuntu Server, my Steam Deck is SteamOS which is just Valve’s heavily modified spin of Arch, and my main lab’s Type-1 hypervisor is XCP-ng, which is basically Fedora under the hood.
I’ve said it here before and I’ll continue to say it. All the Linux nerds (myself included) have strong opinions when it comes to distros or x vs Wayland, or flatpak vs repositories, blah blah blah.
But in the end - none of it matters. You could randomly eliminate all options except for one distro - and we’d happily pick that over windows. The trick is that you could make any distro like any other - it’s just that the distro did all the work for you. So pick the one that matches how you want to use your pc.
Maybe the only thing that’s not changeable is the philosophy behind the distro. Debian - older stuff for stability. Arch - bleeding edge rolling release. Fedora somewhere in the middle. You get the idea.
“Debian - older stuff for stability. Arch - bleeding edge rolling release. Fedora somewhere in the middle.” Very true. I would add that then there are a bunch of others that fill the gaps in between. For instance, Ubuntu makes Debian easier and Mint makes Ubuntu more open and TuxedoOS makes Debian/Ubuntu far more up-to-date. Then, CachyOS makes Arch more easy and gamable while Manjaro tries to make Arch more stable. Fedora is a perfect blend but those those that have a beef against Redhat/IBM (USA), OpenSUSE is a perfect blend too of the philosophies of Debian and Arch.
Arch is also just becoming the standard gaming option.
A lot of gaming communities that are migrating over are flowing to the aur for their community tools.
A lot of gaming communities that are migrating over are flowing to the aur for their community tools.
Wasn’t there malware found in the AUR just last week?
For Linux newbs, AUR is the Arch User Repository where anyone can post packages and scripts. It’s highly recommended to NOT trust anything on there due to the risk of malware. If you don’t use Arch and stick to your distro’s application manager you don’t have to worry about it
I think Fedora KDE is very refined but I stick to Ubuntu bases as there are some little known programs that I use that only have .deb packages unfortunately
Have you heard of Distrobox?
I’ve heard the name but don’t know what it is. Some program to run other distros packages?
Replying cause I want to know too
It appears to be a way of running containers in the terminal with the specific intent to have a certain distro image installed, run a program, and give it permission to interact with your system’s home directory with an easy to launch icon. It looks pretty darn handy, I’m going to give it a try this weekend
For me it mattered. The majority of distros I tested have had audio or graphical issues (or both). Only bazzite and cachyos have worked straight out of the box.
For me, Bluefin as been the only flawless distro.
Yeah and that’s the problem. It does matter which distro and as a result the experience for a noob is horrendous.
The main differences are:
- package management (how you install new programs)
- release model (fixed vs rolling)
- default desktop environments (the GUI / look and feel)
Workflows are different, configuration files can be different, and package names (not just management) can be different.
Additionally, release cadence (how fast you get new stuff, even when considering fixed releases), stability, performance (how were the packages compiled), and custom patches that aren’t part of the original code (*shakes fist angrily at Manjaro*)
If you don’t like Manjaro for that then your going to hate steamOS. Lol
I don’t like how the manjaro team does it specifically. A lot of the time i’ve seen packages break in Manjaro that work fine in Arch, then Manjaro users come into Arch forums acting like its an Arch problem when it isn’t.
Also, their driver install helper causes more problems than it solves, which was especially highlighted in the transition to open source official nvidia drivers. Couldn’t install the open source ones for the longest time, and couldn’t install the right ones from the repo with pacman directly. Caused some major issues for a friend I was helping.
Helped him switch to proper Arch and all the issues went away.
Valve on the other hand puts extreme effort into maintaining stability. I use it regularly and have zero issues, though I use it as-is out of the box.
Agreed.
Though if you get off the beaten path, you get things like system supervisor, system compiler, C library, and core utils.
But most Linux distros are systemd, GCC, Glibc, and GNU utils. Which brings us back to your list.
Yup. Until you get into stuff like immutable distros, because that’s a whole different animal.
I wanted to write a long-ass comment until I remembered the existence of the following excellent guide: https://lemmy.ml/post/18268622 . Please give it a read 😉.
I’ve stickied that to this community.
That guide is so awesome! Thanks for showing me.
Ignore anyone claiming there is some massive performance difference between any distros. That’s some misinformed bullshit.
The main things you need to understand are the layers:
- Kernel
- Libraries
- Package Manager
- UserSpace
The Kernel layer will be largely transparent for you as a beginner. If you want bleeding edge stuff, install a “Rolling Release” distro that updates this layer much more frequently than “LTS (long term support)” releases will, as their function is to remain stable for longer periods of time.
Libraries will also be transparent to you as a new user, and even as experts, we rarely need to mess with this layer unless building something specific, which you will not need to worry about. Do not let the Chaff start talking some bullshit about how you to prefer this or that in distros blah blah …you’re a new user. Ignore that noise.
Package Manager: something to consider as you will be interacting with this. RPM, Apt/Deb and pacman are the big three, and all are very mature and stable. They all perform similar basic functions, just in different ways. You’ll have a preference in time, but any of them work well. It’s not a huge thing you need to worry about, but you’ll surely like one over another in time.
UserSpace: where all the fun stuff is. Stick with a distro that has a large community. The biggest choice in how you will interact with your machine as a desktop user is here in that you want to choose a Desktop Environment, or DE. Gnome and KDE are the big two in this arena, but there are many: Xfce, Cinnamon, Mate…etc. Id suggest starting with Gnome if you like a clean MacOS type interface, or KDE if you really like the more verbose sort of Windows experience. Both are fine choices, and you won’t have problems with either. Again, ignore everyone telling you one is better than the other…they are not. It’s a preference. Try them both, and go with one. You can easily swap later if you want, no big deal.
Lastly: don’t go off and use Bl00pyGameRzX or whatever random distro the loudest asshole in a thread is telling you to use. Again, you’re a new user, you need simple, stable, and a huge community to reference if you have issues.
I suggest Fedora for new users now after Ubuntu shat the bed and soiled their crown. After getting comfortable with things, maybe look into what the difference is between Fedora and Cachy, and if that’s of any use to you. If not, whatever, just keep using what you like. Distro hopping is for aimless people who don’t know what they’re looking for, or how to identify. Use what YOU like, and keep using it as long as you like it. Ignore the hype machine telling you otherwise. That’s the point.
Great comment. Makes me wish that Lemmy allowed comments to be pinned
One correction to this:
The Arch package manager is Pacman, not AUR. AUR is the Arch User Repository and is definitely not stable :)
Whoops, was in a flow. Good catch.
…kinda wanna try Bl00pyGameRzX now
You mean opaque.
And you will definitely find out about libraries if you attempt to install anything.
Some packages will install in your home directory, others, for no apparent reason will spread themselves around the system in the area only available in administration mode. Good luck finding where it all went. The only way I can find is to look at the path in Synaptic, most package managers won’t record it.
This…I don’t understand what this is.
No distro managed by a package manager would be dropping files all over the place as you’re suggesting, not would it require you to interact with or even know which libraries you have installed because it’s all automatically handled by said package manager.
If you’re installing out of band packages, you’re talking about a different thing, and that’s the package maintainer’s fault, not the distro and their maintainers.
General rule of thumb for new users.
Doesn’t like to tinker and non gamer. Fedora
Likes to thinker and non gamer endeavour
Doesn’t like to tinker and gamer bazzite
Likes to tinker and gamer cachy
Arch at this point is no more unstable or prone to breaking then mint or any other distro barring like Debian. Cachy and endeavour with kde6 basically have solved the arch isn’t for new users problem coming from Windows.
So really you just need to ask yourself. Do you want your defaults to include gaming utilities or do you want to have to install them yourself. If your going to game you can save yourself hours as a new user with bazzite or cachy since they come out of the box with a button for “I want to install all the gaming stuff” and your good to go.
If you don’t game and just do basic work then you can go with fedora which will provide a great curated experience that basically just leaves you with a standard and reliable work PC.
Or endeavour which will drop you off right at the point of everything works, is reliable and ready for you to start learning. Even if you choose to never fiddle with anything, you still end up with a system that supports the widest possible amount of hardware and has one of the best user manuals of any distro family.
Seriously for as much as people claim you need a big community for refence material. Between cachy and arches wiki, you have a better source of information than any other option. It’s absurd how useful it is.
Y’all really need to get off the Bazzite thing for new users.
Fedora for gaming is great and has zero issues.
Bazzite is no better than any other distro in this respect EXCEPT that it’s immutable, and going to be a NIGHTMARE for somebody not yet familiar with how things work in a Linux system. It’s edge cases upon edge cases, and the assumption by people pushing this idiocy is that they’ll never need to know how a normal functioning Linux system works if they like it, which is an ignorant supposition.
Stop pushing this narrative to new users, you’re just making it harder on them.
Ubuntu has always been that bad though. Always.
Not at all. It was fine for new users. It was the mostly popular distribution for years for a reason.
Because people recommended it.
There were better options. It crashed or broke all the time. Still does.
It would never be a recommendation for new users from me. I tried every version since 4, so I am not new to its shittyness.
Ran thousands of servers on it for years without a hiccup. No idea what you were doing wrong there, but that’s not my experience.
I suppose I should have clarified: Ubuntu desktop. I don’t really have a problem with Ubuntu server, although why bother when you can just use Debian. Did you choose it for the newer packages?
Ubuntu has specific toolchain stacks that make imaging and packaging easier when you’re running continuously deployed stacks that change frequently.
It’s the difference between Windows 11, Windows 11 Pro, Windows 11 for Enterprise, and Windows Server 2025.
There are differences, but not dramatic differences. Some are just better tuned to certain users than others.
The better comparison is that distros are the operating systems (like “windows”, “macos”, and “android”), while “linux” is the kernel under the hood that end users likely never interact with (like “NT”, “XNU”, and…“linux”).
A distro represents an intended user experience. If you want a distro that has an intended user experience that is similar to windows, go with Mint or OpenSUSE. If your desired experience is like the SteamDeck, install bazzite (with an AMD GPU ideally). If that’s all you care to know, then that’s all you need to know; go use your new system how you would any other.
But if you want to dig deeper, yeah, the fact that all the distros are based on linux (and more importantly, are posix compatible) means that a lot of the software is portable across distros. But that doesn’t mean your experience on all distros will be the same. Different distros organize their filesystems differently, they might ship with different versions of core utilities based on the stability testing they’ve done, and they likely offer varying means of installing and managing new packages.
The tl;dr is, go use one distro, and then later try doing the same stuff in a different distro, and inevitably at some point you’ll go “oh, this didn’t work exactly how I expected because the other distro I’m used to handles this differently”. That’s the difference.
First thing to consider is they all use the same Desktop Environments.
Unlike Windows, in Linux the “graphic” is completely separated from the operating system, any DE can be uses on any distro, so trying different distros that come with the same DE, might make you think there’s very little difference (at first look).
Second, almost all distros are derivatives, that contributes to make them feel similar. The original ones are just a bunch: Debian, Red Hat, Slackware, SuSe, Arch, Gentoo, everything else is based either on one of those or on another derivative, if your curious you can have a look at this graph: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Linux_Distribution_Timeline.svg.
So for example, if you take Ubuntu and Mint, they might look similar because Mint is based on Ubuntu.If you want to see the real differences, you need to look at the original ones, the core differences are: the way software is packaged and managed, and the “philosophy” behind the way the system is overall administered, maintained and released.
Derivatives add differences to the user experience, they main reason they’re created is someone is not completely happy with the way a distro does things and they create one the meets their needs, for example, Debian is improved dramatically on the user experience lately, but many years ago was quite arduous to setup and use for non-experts, so Ubuntu was born.
Now to answer you question
as long as I choose one that gets regular updates, it doesn’t matter fundamentally?
It does matter, tho it’s not as much world-changing as some people seem to think (especially when it comes to gaming).
The most important things are support for your hardware and easy of administration/use. Most distros will recognize and setup your hardware out of the box, but some might require tinkering or extra steps. Some distros automate almost everything so the user doesn’t need to think about it, others require more knowledge and more manual intervention, you have a much finer control of your system this way at the expense of some user friendliness, it’s up to you to decide what you prefer.
Then it comes the Desktop Environment, different DEs do things differently, which one to choose is totally personal preference.
As for software, unless you go after some niche obscure distro, you shouldn’t have problems finding it in the distro repositories. For edge cases you can always use Flatpaks or AppImages.
