If linux distributions were tools. - eviltoast
  • mlg@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    79
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    1 year ago

    The swiss army knife should not be Ubuntu lol. Ubuntu would be like the dollar store knockoff that falls apart with use.

    • Pirasp@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      You mean to say the version where the Victorinox logo is replaced with the Ubuntu one?

      Looks half way convincing but is shit in reality?

      • mlg@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        26
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        Used it for 2 years on desktop and server.

        Documentation is always outdated and useless. GNOME is crap. apt has a dependency issue every week. Repos have software ranging from bleeding edge to horrendously outdated. Netplan is next level stupid and also decides to break for no reason. Systemd waits for network to boot by default because reasons. Versioning and LTS adds more magic fun to doing anything because of the aforementioned documentation. Last time I used it, still had crap interoperability when switching DEs for some weird reason. Canonical is the big dumb dumb. All the downstreams inherit the same problems like PopOS and elementary.

        I took all of that experience and thought it was the default linux expectations until I got to try Debian for server and Fedora for desktop.

        Unfortunately, people make the same mistake as me and then assume broken Ubuntu is just how linux is.

        Credit though, it did get to teach me the general ins and outs of linux because I needed to fix or change something every other week.

          • Zangoose@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            Not OP, I like gnome and all but I Ubuntu’s extensions/custom version of gnome is awful and makes trying to change settings so much worse because the gnome documentation doesn’t always match with all of the changes Ubuntu adds on top. Maybe they’re talking about that?

            • banneryear1868@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Can’t you just use another desktop environment if you don’t like the pre-packaged gnome? I just see Ubuntu as a flavor of Debian made for ease of use.

              • Zangoose@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                That’s true, but installing a whole new desktop environment also kind of goes against the whole “ease of use” part. If someone’s going to go to a whole different flavor they might as well just use something like Mint or Mint DE unless they specifically need Ubuntu for a dev environment or program/driver compatibility. That way they can still get the ease of use benefit but without dealing with all of the weird oddities that Ubuntu can introduce.

                • banneryear1868@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Yeah I just find for newer users the amount of Ubuntu support has always been a huge plus if you’re just getting in to messing with Linux. It’s a lot better now but it used to be things like “how to do x on Ubuntu,” there would always be some super easy to follow tutorial. My personal preference is just a Debian install but the more catered experiences like Mint and Ubuntu do a great job at presenting Debian to daily users without any hassle.

      • rambaroo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Ubuntu LTS is the least stable LTS Linux distro I’ve ever used. There’s why I avoid Ubuntu. It isn’t about normies it’s about avoiding Canonical.

      • Aganim@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        It most certainly does. It’s the only distro that I do not trust anymore to do a proper job of automatically partitioning your drive during setup, after getting complaints from my parents that Ubuntu refused to install updates. Turned out it had created a rediciously small boot partition and was now complaining that it had not enough space left to install new kernel versions as they kept around all old ones. “Because users might want to use those”, according to their documentation. Bitch, you market yourself as the distro suitable for absolute beginners, but you not only expect them to know what a kernel is, but also that they clean them up their selves? What an absolutely moronic decision.

        I’ve had broken installations after upgrades to a major version in the past and I’ve seen a number of colleagues switch to plain Debian or Arch derivatives after Ubuntu decided to crap out after a major upgrade.

        I’ve seen Ubuntu systems not being able to upgrade due to circular dependencies that couldn’t be resolved by Apt, package Foo requires Bar, Bar requires Baz, Baz requires Foo. Or even packages from their own repository that couldn’t be upgraded because some dependency wasn’t available anymore.

        Just a handful of the issues I’ve encountered with Ubuntu. Personally I’m done with that distro. If it works for you, by all means use it. But I don’t help friends and colleagues (we all get to choose our own distro fortunately, but also have to fix issues ourselves) anymore when they decide to go Ubuntu. Use a proper distro if you want my help, not that Fisher-Price ‘My First Linux’ crap.