Fedora

Because it ran slowly on my Thinkpad x41.

For kekistan!

Going to be trying out NixOS and then GuixSD.

-redhat testbed
-systemd
-used by pathetic shills on Jow Forums
-used by sheeple who use it only because Linus uses it
-used by frogniggers

Because installing it gave me a critical error and I was too lazy to fix it. Ended up with manjaro.

Attached: 1540216186962.png (480x480, 25K)

I do use it and it's really good. Also muh security. SELinux just werks, kernel modules are signed, Secure Boot works ootb with MS UEFI CA keys, MOK allows enrolling your own keys for akmods and DKMS.
>arch but even more trash
wewlad
>-redhat testbed
Wrong. Fedora is practically independent.
>-systemd
The best implementation of it. Unlike LITERALLY ANY OTHER DISTRO, it just werks and Fedora actually makes use of its features instead of slapping /etc/hackjob.d on top of it.
>-used by pathetic shills on Jow Forums
I disagree with the pathetic part.
>-used by sheeple who use it only because Linus uses it
Neither have I ever heard this being an actual reason, nor does it matter.
>-used by frogniggers
Discrimination.
I unironically considered buying a fedora to complete the meme circle.
Enjoy the copypasta (shortened):
Occasionally, fa/g/lords will sperg out about which distro is truly superior—usually Arch due to its "minimalism", Debian due to its "stability", Ubuntu due to its "ease of use", et cetera. All more or less incorrect, of course; Arch's kernel has an allyesconfig which is unnecessary bloat and counterarguments its self-proclaimed DIY nature, Debian's main meme is being ancient as all hell, and Ubuntu's everything generally sucks—from apt and its ways of handling dependencies to the varied degrees of bloat you get upon a fresh install. Yes, that includes Server as well for the most part. In comparison, Fedora is about as fresh as a distro can get.
>just werks systemd and proper SELinux
>libre where it counts
>intended to above-medium users, so it focuses more on polishing the distro and development tools
>Packages are compiled with hardening options like position-independend-executable
>Developers are professionals and not careless basement autists or retarded SJW trannies that remove packages just because they have the word "boob" in it.

I use Debian but if I wasn't I would pick Fedora

Because I use a Debian based distro and I prefer APT to YUM though I was impressed by DNF.

> Also muh security. SELinux just werks
And the rest doesn't.

But I am. Currently the XFCE Spin.
I've also installed the KDE Spin, which so far has been the single most "just werks" experience on my 2010 Macbook Pro so far.
I'm trying XFCE right now because even though KDE looks great and everything is well integrated, it's a bit sluggish on the old hardware, XFCE feels much snappier.

In a couple of weeks I'm putting my SSD back into the Laptop so I'll reinstall the system again.
I'm not sure which distro/spin I should install though.
I kinda want to go for Arch, because I think I found solutions for the last few issues I had with it, and I do like minimalism and building the system up just the way I want.
On the other hand, the "just werks" nature of Fedora, while still being cutting edge, and my very good experience with it so far, make it an attractive candidate as well.
It'll definitely be either the XFCE or KDE spin. I want to use a different window manager (bspwm) and that doesn't work with GNOME.

Both of those sound like very interesting distributions, I wish you well.

Except that's wrong. It all just werks.

Part of the reason I'm using Fedora now is because I couldn't stop distrohopping and changing my mind on how I wanted to rice shit. I threw Fedora with the default gnome desktop on my laptop and I'm making myself use it for at least a few months.
Arch is cool, I used it for awhile messing around with ricing things and had a good time. The Arch community can be pretty annoying and it gets shit on a lot here, but I think it's fine for when you're wanting to check out the more minimal distros. If you like it and want to go deeper down that rabbit hole of building everything from the ground up, Gentoo is unironically great for it and you will learn a lot if you put the time into it. I've heard slackware/void are as well but haven't personally checked them out.

I've been using Arch Linux for years, but I'm actually planning a switch to Fedora Silverblue once 30 releases. I honestly believe it's the future of the Linux desktop, and other distros will be following suit. I love the modern innovation it's doing with the immutable OS image, RPM-OSTree, package layering, pet containers, Flatpak for applications, etc.

The issue I have with what you're saying here is that ALL distros are fine for checking out minimal environments. That's not Arch's strong point, the strong point of Arch is K.I.S.S. which means things are supposed to be simplistic, like Pacman, like the wiki, the idea of the Arch ethos is simplicity in implementation, which is why it's good for rolling release - things are taken vanilla, minimally tested then quickly added to the repos.

Upstream is why people use Arch, NOT ricing and minimalism. It's why I use it. Otherwise I'd probably have carry on with my Windows phase.

Although I am a Manjaro user atm.

Steam.

I tried fedora core 2 and the package management was so painfully slow, I haven't touched it since.
Probably just needed a mirror sorting or some shit.
Plus it was the first time I tried gnome, which was probably another strike against it.
I was new.