People who use Ubuntu?

if so what are your reasons behind using it?

Attached: Ubuntu.jpg (500x500, 23K)

Other urls found in this thread:

sites.google.com/site/easylinuxtipsproject/reserve-8
packages.linuxmint.com
archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu
security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/
archive.canonical.com/ubuntu/
twitter.com/AnonBabble

It just werks

This. Also pic related. (have installed gentoo / used to use arch as main os)

Attached: 1529561326390.jpg (1000x1000, 282K)

I usually use Debian, but Ubuntu is stable, well-supported, and it's the most common *nix so any development tutorials will have Ubuntu in mind. This means any PPAs set up by a dev will just werk on my machine. So will basically any web-dev things. I can choose snap, flatpak, or even nix / guix to install programs and they all work perfectly out-of-the-box.

eh

It has apt, but you get isolated from the retardation that comes from Plebian. The only way you notice it's Plebian with a twist is that some smaller, Plebian-made packages (software that didn't bow to the retarded release cycle) don't work.

I'm not an autistic faggot who feels like he needs to have an obscure distro. Ubuntu is perfectly fine and all you need to do is settle on the DE you prefer.

I had a project when I was working with cent os I did not run into too many problems and installed only what I wanted from the operating system
The computer was old and it worked fine
Maybe that's a good reason to start from 0

Super-autists will contend that it's backed by a for-profit company, but so are Fedora, openSUSE and many others.

I started with debian, then switched to mint.
2 weeks linux user here

I've used manjaro and that's basically it, I stopped for a while and have mainly forgotten most of what I knew. Now I am going to just dive into arch and use tutorials to get me through it; wish me luck.

Smart people use: Debian, Ubuntu, SUSE, Gentoo etc. depending on their actual use case and experience
Dumb people use certain distros because of some meme they heard about it. Best example: they use Arch because it is "minimalist" or because it "teaches you to use linux" but all they actually do is read wiki pages and edit come config files for ricing

This. Playing simon says with wiki articles doesn't make you know Linux.

Because I don't have time to babysit a retarded distro like arch or gentoo.

Attached: WOKEAPUMAN.jpg (657x527, 31K)

Mint is pretty based actually. I've been using Loonix for over a decade, and Mint is my favorite desktop so far. Nothing beats headless CentOS though. t.boomer.

>format a disk from NTFS to EXT4
>can't create files, delete files or whatever
>chown doens't work
Ganno/Loonix is a piece of shit! FUCK YOU ALL Jow Forums!

Is manjaro reliable and usable ? Where does it rank on
I don't use Ubuntu because the amazon thing skeezes me out

There are basically two /smart/ optiosn when it comes to Linux distros.

1. Ubuntu: should be used by non-technical people, some desktops, businesses, etc.

2. Debian: those more inclined to technical aspects of computers. Those who want a less-bloated experience. Servers, etc.

Other than that, don't bother.

It jusd wergs

>bloated
stopped reading there

t. guy whose only experience with linux is reading about it on Jow Forums

ti stuj krews

t. NEETs who have 15 hours a day to tweak their cum-encrusted ThinkPad's running Arch with i3 gaps or some gay shit like that.

Stuck a nerve there, eh?

>>format a disk from NTFS to EXT4
>>can't create files, delete files or whatever
>>chown doens't work
>Ganno/Loonix is a piece of shit! FUCK YOU ALL Jow Forums!
YEAH IT IS!

Attached: 1522892745647.jpg (1095x662, 126K)

Debian as a server? Put on your big-boy pants and step into some CentOS RedHat motherfucker!

Installed Kubuntu, everything just werks. Snap integration is great, font rendering is decent unlike Wangblows, no Amazon on the desktop, PPAs are useful, and I get 5 years of free security updates ahead of me.

i use arch because i want the AUR and i prefer having headers + binaries in one package
that's it

I run a distro called Zorin I like it because it runs like a tank.
Once you harden your browser (https everywhere, unblock, anti-Adblock script etc etc) you can browse pretty much anywhere and not worry about malware.

I came back to it after 15 years of using Linux
It just werkz™

there is literally nothing wrong with using ubuntu

Started out on Debian back in 97. Like everyone else I loved Debian which was miles better than the rest, but hated the politics which paralyzed it for years. Like everyone else I jumped ship to Ubuntu and stayed with it. It's also a great server platform.

Just werkz brilliantly well.

18.04 default is amazing, the best DE I've used next to Xfeces.
This is coming from someone who hates Gnome 3 (Fedora Gnome sucks).

Everything just works and it's pretty.
After using Xubuntu for a long time I figured it's time to give Ubuntu another shot (unity was bad).

I'm really impressed with 18.04, I have new respect for Gnome now

you realize the amazon thing was like 5 years ago or some shit. i still use debian either way but bad excuse user

there's no real difference between the two

fedora gnome is not a thing user

RPM based distros are shit
apt-get master race
easy to use, most of the time
getting better and better
BTW, I use Kubuntu, not Ubuntu

>apt-get
you mean apt user

kubuntu is ubuntu

This is so true. Although i settled with Solus for now

People forget that Gnome2 sucked as well until Ubuntu fixed it.

fuck apt, I use apt-get

some people think they are different things, I think the base system is what defines a distro, so yeah, I agree with you, Kubuntu = Ubuntu. I specified Kubuntu because people think they somehow are different distros
by that definition, AFAIU, Mint is also ubuntu

fpbp

No, Mint is not Ubuntu. You can easily install KDE desktop on a vanilla Ubuntu system and it will be exactly the same as Kubuntu from scratch, but being able to switch to the vanilla Ubuntu at any time. Same with MATE and XFCE.

Speaking of Gnome2, the MATE team have done a really good job at integrating MATE into Ubuntu. I'd use Ubuntu MATE more often, but I don't like dealing with GTKancer-based desktops. I'd say that MATE is currently the best of the GTK DEs. If GTK4 becomes a thing and unravels the mess that is GTK3, then I'll consider switching for good. Until then, I'll stick to KDE.

I agree I'm using Mate 16.04 and it's pretty much how Ubuntu was before Unity. But I thought Unity was OK I setup my mother's computer with it and she liked it a lot more than the old Gnome.

mint != ubuntu lmao

What? There's no way that was 5 years ago it was like 6 months ago
But isn't it still there

maybe you heard about six months ago user

I did a bit of distro hopping, only to finally settle on Ubuntu with the mindset that I'd start looking again when I encounter a problem with this distro that cannot easily be fixed. Something that would really make me look elsewhere.

Haven't found it yet.

Yeah, yours.

Ubuntu + some extra repos, then

from sites.google.com/site/easylinuxtipsproject/reserve-8
deb packages.linuxmint.com tara main upstream import backport

deb archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu bionic main restricted universe multiverse
deb archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu bionic-updates main restricted universe multiverse
deb archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu bionic-backports main restricted universe multiverse

deb security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ bionic-security main restricted universe multiverse
deb archive.canonical.com/ubuntu/ bionic partner

Only reason I liked ubuntu was: unity
Now, why would I use ubuntu when I can have GNOME on arch linux?

inb4
>you can still use unity on arch or ubuntu just install it
I need reliable DE

>I need reliable DE
Xubuntu

Ubuntu base/server 18.04 = god tier
XFCE = god tier

Someone already did the hard working integrating defaults so I don't have to set mugshot and lightdm myself. There's no reason to use anything else.

Usually everything works out of the box
Everything I want is on official repos or added repos.

The Window manager and environment is the most consistent (at least under Unity). IDK why it's so fucking hard to have a consistent look on everything. Not even Fedora does this on it's own home grown environment.

I also use it for servers. LTS. Every server software I want to use supports Ubuntu LTS releases and Ubuntu Server is quite stable for everything I want to do.

I experiment around, but I always end up on Ubuntu Desktop. Mint was an exception, it was quite nice. elementary's pantheon is unreliable and limited.

Arch was too much maintenance weekly and impractical for server use.

Fedora has a very nice installer. Yum/dnf is also very nice to use compared to apt. But man do I hate the default Gnome 3 setup. CentOS for server is like 7 years behind in updates. Maybe useful for office servers on a network, but not my thing for something I want to run more up to date software. Debian similar thing. I've never use Debian for desktops, only servers, and mostly just for stuff like Proxmox VM and containers hosts.

I liked Xubuntu the most back several years ago, before XFCE became a ghost town in terms of development. XFCE/Xubuntu was so perfect, and looked good enough against Windows 7 that I could see business clients using it for their office PCs. Xubuntu/XFCE would be god tier if the UI/UX was improved and updated to something more modern. In a sense elementary/Pantheon is similar, but Pantheon falls short. Xubuntu's Windows decorations are abysmal. Looks like you're working in some Windows XP themed skin.

5 billion distros, and not one, maybe Mint Cinnamon, would I ever trust to have some random average person try and use it without being less confused than macOS or Windows.

Attached: Xubuntu business desktop config v1.jpg (3870x2190, 1.06M)

this and it's so easy to change the DE

I find arch linux + GNOME comfy
After arch installation:
- install GNOME
- sudo systemctl enable gdm.service
Done.
Working on my desktop without issues for the last 6 months.

I prefer arch over ubuntu because it's popular community distro and because AUR sometimes can be helpfull.

I've done a lot of production work with Ubuntu and it's not just the stablility of LTS which is good, but the amount of integration testing they perform. It's easy to deploy a typical stack on Ubuntu and it works well.