(Also extends to people who refuse to use Linux too!)

Every unique Linux Desktop setup tells a story, about the user’s journey and their trials. I feel like every decision, ranging from theming to functional choices, is a direct reflection of who we are on the inside.

An open-ended question for the Linux users here: Why do you use what you do? What are the choices you’ve had to make when planning it out?

I’ll go first: I use OpenSUSE Tumbleweed with the Niri Scrolling Compositor(Rofi, Alacritty and Waybar), recently switched from CosmicDE

I run this setup because I keep coming back to use shiny new-ish software on a daily basis.

I prefer this over arch(which I used for 2 years in the covid arc), because it’s quite a bit more stable despite being a rolling release distro.

I chose niri because I miss having a dual monitor on the go, and tiling windows isn’t good enough for me. Scrolling feels smooth, fancy and just right. The overview menu is very addicting, and I may not be able to go back to Windows after this!

This was my first standalone WM/Compositor setup, so there were many little pains, but no regrets.

Would love to hear more thoughts, perspectives and experiences!

  • daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    16 days ago

    Astrology, but penguin themed.

    You are such a Debian.

    Arch and Gentoos never got along.

    If you are a Nix do not install KDE on the first monday of the month, it’s bad luck.

  • Snot Flickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    16 days ago

    Me with every new Linux installation:

    My network looks like George Foreman’s kids names.

    Anyway I use Ubuntu to make other Linux users mad. Stay mad, nerds.

    • sounddrill@programming.devOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      16 days ago

      Actually, Ubuntu is pretty good if not for the snap issue

      I would unironically use it on a system that can run it fine without the loss in performance being noticeable

  • neon_nova@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    16 days ago

    I use Fedora with Plasma.

    I hate customizing ui elements, so I wanted something that used plasma and looked good with tweaking things.

    I don’t want to deal with Snap, so my choices were a bit limited, but I’ve used Fedora in the past and liked it. I still do.

    I did try arch with plasma and couldn’t get hardware video decoding to work in the browser, so I switched to Fedora. I was pleasantly surprised that Fedora had so much more configured for my laptop out of the box.

  • Maragato@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    14 days ago

    I also use openSUSE Tumbleweed for the same reasons as you. In my case I also like the security configuration that openSUSE has (SELinux+Firewalld) and its snapshot restore tool in case of failure (snapper). I think openSUSE is one of the distributions that enforces security the most as soon as you install the system and to maintain that security I try to install only the software I need and I try not to add external repositories. I would like to try Aeon because I think it is a more security-focused distro but I still need to dual-boot with Windows to connect to my work and Aeon doesn’t allow this. In short, I use Tumbleweed as it comes out of the box and just add the packman repository. Many people think that Linux is free of malware and viruses and install many programs from aur, obs, external repositories,… without thinking that they are giving root access to code of dubious origin.

  • pyssla@quokk.au
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    16 days ago

    I use secureblue, because it offers the (AFAIK unique) intersection between:

    • a security-first[1] approach while being fit for general computing
    • a first-class citizen of the ‘immutable’ reprovisionable, anti-hysteresis paradigm
    • a well-maintained project with many active contributors that exhibit a proactive stance when it comes to implementing (security) improvements

    1. To be precise, it’s actually Linux-first and security-second. For an actual security-first approach, consider taking a look at Sculpt OS employed with the seL4 kernel run on ARM or 64-bit RISC-V. ↩︎

  • Asfalttikyntaja@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    14 days ago

    I’m old and not keen on tinkering around anymore, that’s why I use Linux Mint Cinnamon. It just works and doesn’t take much time to maintain.

    • pmk@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      14 days ago

      Same. I have installed so many systems that I just want the defaults to be what I’m used to. The OS itself is just a tool to let me work on the things I actually find interesting.

  • /home/pineapplelover@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    14 days ago

    I use arch with kde with very little modification apart from changing wallpapers and taskbar stuff to make it more windows like. I’m a boring guy who still can’t get away from the Windows feel

  • Die Martin Die@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    14 days ago

    I started with Puppy Linux because I wanted to try Linux, and my 350MHz Celeron with 160MB of RAM and 4GB of disk space (of which I had around 1GB free) wasn’t enough to run neither any flavor of the major distros, nor any remotely recent version of Windows that wasn’t XP stripped down to the bare minimum, and even that ran like shit. This was around 2008.

    After being able to afford a more recent machine (3GHz Intel something Dual Core, with 4GB of RAM and 500GB HDD), I switched to vanilla Ubuntu, with its Unity DE, then Xfce4.

    I’ve been using the LUbuntu flavor (LXDE) since it is more lightweight than the alternatives. Don’t really care about bells and whistles now, just a functional and fast desktop.

    My most recent laptop is dead now, tho, and I don’t see myself getting anything soon :(

  • the_wiz@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    16 days ago

    I use Devuan and TDE because the setup is so incredible boring and dusty that i do not have to get acquainted with anything new (SystemD, Wayland… whatever hipster WM is currently cool) and keep working with the tools i like.

  • TransDesiTrekkie@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    15 days ago

    I’m a fairly new user to Linux and I first got a laptop with Pop OS since I read that it was a beginner friendly distro and great for gaming. Although I didn’t use it for gaming it was great to get to learn how to use Linux and use it for everyday purposes.

    I later with lots of trial and error got Fedora Linux working on an old laptop with bad battery life that was lying around. I wanted to try my hand at a bit more of an advanced distro. So far I’m loving both distributions and learning more each day about how things work.

  • Captain Aggravated@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    16 days ago

    My current main machine uses Fedora KDE because at the time I built the machine and installed the OS, Mint Cinnamon did not have particularly good Wayland support, and I needed Wayland to access certain features of my GPU and monitor combo.

    I used Mint Cinnamon for ten solid years on my older machines, Cinnamon is still my favorite distro, I tried a couple early on, Cinnamon just felt like home and I stayed there for a decade. But it was kind of jank on my new machine so I went with KDE.

  • Domi@lemmy.secnd.me
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    16 days ago

    Fedora Kinoite, because it fits my workflow the best and has a nice mixture of stable and leading edge.

    Everything I run was containerized either way (Flatpak, Docker or Podman) long before I switched to an immutable distro.

    I have lots of different development environments for various versions of different programming languages that are incredibly easy to setup, throw away and recreate with toolbox without having to dive into the language specific tools for creating virtual environments (venv, conda, …). On regular Linux/Windows systems I end up at a point after a few years where there is junk laying around everywhere from 6 different PHP versions, 7 gcc variants and 8 .NET versions.

    I was on Fedora KDE before that and the main reason for choosing it was that Ubuntu/Debian/Mint were too old to include firmware for my GPU. Arch and derivatives are on the opposite side of the spectrum and are too new for my taste, I’m fine with waiting a few weeks for .1 versions to release with bugfixes.

    As for why not Bazzite or Aurora: Because I wanted to be as close to the original (Fedora & KDE) as possible. The modifications those distros make (and I need), I can do myself in a few minutes.

    I do recommend Bazzite or Aurora for less experienced people though, they have a lot of tweaks that Kinoite is really lacking. Kinoite, just like the Fedora KDE variant has a lot of polishing issues that quickly become gigantic obstacles for beginners (Nvidia drivers, Flathub repository, H264/H265 codecs, missing udev rules, …)

  • Jesus_666@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    16 days ago

    I run Garuda because it’s a more convenient Arch with most relevant things preinstalled. I wanted a rolling release distro because in my experience traditional distros are stable until you have to do a version upgrade, at which point everything breaks and you’re better off just nuking the root partition and reinstalling from scratch. Rolling release distros have minor breakage all the time but don’t have those situations where you have to fix everything at the same time with a barely working emergency shell.

    The AUR is kinda nice as well. It certainly beats having to manually configure/make obscure software myself.

    For the desktop I use KDE. I like the traditional desktop approach and I like being able to customize my environment. Also, I disagree with just about every decision the Gnome team has made since GTK3 so sticking to Qt programs where possible suits me fine. I prefer Wayland over X11; it works perfectly fine for me and has shiny new features X11 will never have.

    I also have to admit I’m happy with systemd as an init system. I do have hangups over the massive scope creep of the project but the init component is pleasant to work with.

    Given that after a long spell of using almost exclusively Windows I came back to desktop Linux only after windows 11 was announced, I’m quite happy with how well everything works. Sure, it’s not without issues but neither is Windows (or macOS for that matter).

    I also have Linux running on my home server but that’s just a fire-and-forget CoreNAS installation that I tell to self-update every couple months. It does what it has to with no hassle.

  • kyub@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    16 days ago

    When I was new to the Linux desktop world (late 90s to 200x) I tried lots of different distros and (X11) window managers and tools and whatnot. Changed themes a lot. And so on. And I think there’s value in all that, because it expands your horizon of what’s possible on the desktop, how different UI/UX paradigms work out in practice for you, and you learn how to use different environments.

    On the other hand, there’s also value in having a consistent, well-integrated desktop environment. It can mean less “pain points” in various circumstances, and it’s also efficient when multiple programs share the same libraries or code base instead of having separate tools all around.

    In the end, it comes down to what works best for you. But this might also change over time. For example I’m really considering switching to Cosmic once it’s mature. I’m also considering taking a look at Niri because it seems well thought-out. But currently I feel cozy using Plasma at home and Gnome at work because Plasma is currently the least-annoying and at work I still use Gnome because it’s been historically more stable than Plasma for me. I’ve tweaked Plasma’s hotkeys so they work more like Gnome’s and since I also need to use a couple of Windows-based systems at work I’ve also configured common Windows shortcuts like Super+L, Super+E, Super+R so that they all behave the same everywhere.

    Oh, and my distro is Arch everywhere because I’ve used it for ages now and I like its technical simplicity, stability and modularity. It’s the one distro that gets in my way the least.

    I think one should learn enough to be flexible and be able to use everything, while also not being too narrow-minded and just focus on one solution too much. What works best for you now might not be the best choice for you in a couple of years.

  • josefo@leminal.space
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    16 days ago

    I use either debian with plasma, or mint with cinnamon. Why? Because it fucking works out of the box and I can use my computer. I rarely customize my DE. I usually end up customizing my terminal more.