I have tried Linux as a DD on and off for years but about a year ago I decided to commit to it no matter the cost. First with Mint, then Ubuntu and a few others sprinkled in briefly. Both are “mainstream” “beginner friendly” distros, right? I don’t want anything too advanced, right?
Well, ubuntu recently updated and it broke my second monitor (Ubuntu detected it but the monitor had “no signal”). After trying to fix it for a week, I decided to wipe it and reinstall. No luck. I tried a few other distros that had the same issue and I started to wonder if it was a hardware issue but I tried a Windows PC and the monitor worked no problem.
Finally, just to see what would happen I tried a distro very very different than what I’m used to: Fedora (Kinode). And not only did everything “just work” flawlessly, but it’s so much faster and more polished than I ever knew Linux to be!
Credit where it’s due, a lot of the polish is due to KDE plasma. I’d never strayed from Gnome because I’m not an expert and people recommend GNOME to Linux newbies because it’s “simple” and “customizable” but WOW is KDE SO MUCH SIMPLER AND STILL CUSTOMIZEABLE. Gnome is only “simple” in that it doesn’t allow you to do much via the GUI. With Fedora Kinode I think I needed to use the terminal maybe once during setup? With other distros I was constantly needed to use the terminal (yes its helped me learn Linux but that curve is STEEP).
The atomic updates are fantastic too. I have not crashed once in the two weeks of setup whereas before I would have a crash maybe 1-2 times per week.
I am FULLY prepared for the responses demanding to know what I did to make it crash and telling me how I was using it wrong blah blah blah but let me tell you, if you are experienced with Windows but want to learn Linux and getting frustrated by all the “beginner” distros that get recommended, do yourself a favor and try Fedora Kinode!
edit: i am DYING at the number of “you’re using it wrong” comments here. never change people.
You must log in or register to comment.
-
Updates inevitably lead to things breaking sometimes. If you want to avoid things breaking as often, using something stable (like Debian) would help.
-
The benefits you are describing are probably because of KDE vs Gnome and not a distro thing.
-
Fedora does things differently than Ubuntu/Debian (mainly package management, but there are other small things). Because of this, noobs & intermediate users alike will get frustrated at things “not being how they are supposed to be”
All that said, if Fedora works for you, keep on using it. I daily drove it for about a year before switching to other things.
-
Fedora’s always run really sluggishly for me on whatever hardware I’ve tried it on, so I don’t recommend it in general because my personal experience with it hasn’t been great.
Even ignoring this, I’m not sure I’d recommend it for beginners due to how it tends to jump on the latest hip new software. For some users this is a massive point in Fedora’s favour, but I’m not sure how much I’d trust a beginner to, say, maintain a BTRFS filesystem properly. Not to mention the unlikely, but still present, possibility of issues caused by such new software.
I had sluggish experience with SUSE. Updates were slow. Installation was very slow.
Starting apps was not as snappy.
Promise of snapshots was great, but not unique.
Overall slower than my regular distro experience killed it for me.
I simply asked myself: will it bug me every time I use the laptop? The answer was yes, and decided to end it.
My først linux experience is actually Fedora 39. I was just hooked on how it looks, (Gnome) but I don’t know anything under the hood. But I wio recommend it to noons like me, because I know there is a lot of help in the internet, and we all have to start somewhere. And BTW I’m not someone who understands all the technics and coding orstuff.
if you like fedora, have you tried endeavour?
I have not but it was actually on my list of distros to try if Fedora didn’t work out. I should give it a look.
Usually people recommend what they use and like. A majority of people is on ubuntu/mint. Hence, they recommend that. I don’t like apt and I’d never send someone in the debian world unless they want a server. But nowadays the package manager doesn’t matter too much anyway. You should use flatpaks first, and then distrobox, nix, or native (rpm). You won’t feel a real difference between major distros because you don’t interact with the underlying system too much.
Fedora is perfect for beginners. And especially atomic versions as you said are great for beginners. Atomic versions are not good for tinkerers, so if you send someone who wants to customize his experience heavily, he’s going to have a hard time on atomic versions as a beginner. A casual pc user who will edit docs and browse internet prpfits immensely from fedora and atomic version. Fedora has awesome defaults and a new user does not need to care about recent advances in linux because fedora implements them already. Especially ublue improves upon fedora’s ecosystem.
Friends don’t let friends use IBM software.
Fedora is upstream of Red Hat now. It’s developed by the community, then IBM/Red Hat steal it lol.
then IBM/Red Hat steal it lol.
Not really. RH provides all the hosting for the Fedora project, pays multiple people to work on it full time, and on top of that, the RPM specs (which are used to actually build packages) are all MIT licensed. It’d be like complaining bluehat steals the Linux kernel by cloning it from a git repo and making/distributing their own version of it, which is exactly what they do.
I do. Nobara specifically since it has the non-free repos and codecs by default, and a bunch of tweaks for gaming and editing already set up or easily added in the Welcome app.
Because on Fedora sometimes you are required to use terminal for some stuff like installing nvidia drivers and you dont really want to send a total beginner to Fedora
Nvidia can be installed through the App Store (or whatever it’s called) now. You just have to enable the non-OSS repo in the settings.
idk I have only needed the terminal once, with Ubuntu/Gnome it was a daily occurrence.
What were you using the terminal for that now you don’t need it? I personally prefer KDE to GNOME as well, and I think lots of it can be related to that and not the distro itself.
@flork I would say the main reason is that the best of Fedora is under the hood, and goes completely unnoticed by the general public. Beginners don’t care how and when Wayland, PipeWire, zram or SELinux were implemented.
Other reasons:
- The system requires manual intervention after the initial installation (e.g. RPMFusion)
- Some choices, such as firewalld and Anaconda, are not so good for beginners
- Bad marketingI wouldn’t be confident in recommending Fedora to noobs, because its a distribution that is on the bleeding edge side. But it depends on what type of noob we are talking about. There are noobs in Linux, who are technically well versed in Windows and have no problem in adapting to a new system. If someone wants to have the newest software, then Fedora might be it.
Also not many people have experience with Fedora, therefore less likely to be recommended. Most people use or used Ubuntu, maybe even started with Ubuntu. You or me may not like it, but its proven that Ubuntu is generally a good choice for newcomers to get into Linux. And that also plays into how many people know and are able to help. In contrast, Fedora is too much of a niche.
Fedora is not bleeding edge like Arch. It’s “leading edge”; the packages are a lot more tested before being deployed.
People being more experienced with Ubuntu/Debian is a good point
How are the packages more tested than on Arch? Both systems have multiple testing stages in place, doesn’t it? In Archlinux there are 2 more stages before it lands on the actual end user. Sometimes one has to wait long time, in example for me RetroArch was updated after 6 weeks after official release. That’s not bleeding edge at all. Only the system core files get updated extremely quick. But that’s only about updating new packages.
The “leading edge” term of Fedora is about a total different aspect. It’s leading, because Fedora adopts certain technologies first, before even Archlinux adopts it. In example Pipewire. Archlinux waits a bit before the technology is adopted widespread, while Fedora is leading and adopting it early. And that has nothing to do about how often the packages itself get updated. People often mixup these two things (and so I did probably).
From this article, an interview with Fedora’s project leader:
On the other hand, the long-term distributions work by basically not making changes. Fedora doesn’t follow that, your packages will get updated. We try to make it so that major breaking changes happen on releases rather than just as updates. But sometimes, if there is a security problem, we will put out a newer version of something. So for that kind of stable, it is much less so."
That’s why Fedora users are stuck with e.g. the older GNOME version until the next release.
The difference between Fedora and Debian regarding stability is that there’s a new Fedora release every 6 months, while on Debian you have to wait like 2 (?) years for major updates.
That’s how I always interpreted the term “leading edge”.
By that description, Ubuntu does the same, matching the release cycle of non LTS Ubunu versions; every 6 months with breaking changes (just like Fedora). The difference to Fedora is, that Ubuntu users do not need to upgrade to the next major version, while Fedora have to, because there is only one version.
I’ve recently converted two people from Windows to Linux with Fedora Kinoite. One of them has been using it for maybe two months now without a single issue and the other just started using it with positive first impressions. I find it very modern, simple, and familiar. The atomic system just works too. I enjoy it much more than Mint
Agreed on all counts! I really can’t express enough how impressed I am.
I find it pretty problematic how Ubuntu is messed up and still used as default distro.
Fedora has issues with always being a bit early. I prefer it a lot over buggy Kubuntu, as I use KDE, but for example now 6.1 is too early and still has bugs, while Plasma 6 was really well tested (with Rawhide, Kinoite beta and Kinoite nightly being available)
Fedora has tons of variants and packages, and COPR is full of stuff. The forums are nice, Discourse is a great tool.
It uses Flatpak, but adds its legally restricted repo by default.
The traditional variants… I think apt is better. I did one dnf system upgrade to F40 and it was pretty messy.
The rpm-ostree atomic desktops are really good, but not complete. For example GRUB is simply not updated at all. This is hopefully fixed with F41.
Or the NVIDIA stuff, or nonfree codecs, which are all issues even more on atomic.
So the product is not really ready to use, while rpmfusion sync issues happen multiple times a year. This is no issue on the atomic variants, but there you need to layer many packages, which causes very slow updates.
I am also not a fan of their “GUI only” way, so you will for example never have useful common CLI tools on the atomic variants, for no reason.
It is pretty completely vanilla, which is very nice.
I always recommend Pop_OS! for beginners. It’s IMHO a lot closer to what Ubuntu used to be, uses apt and/or flatpaks (and no snaps), has sane defaults, a good installer, a decent company behind it, nvidia drivers included and their upcoming Cosmic desktop environment looks sick.
Also, I feel like this is a better Fedora-based distro for beginners since it’s harder to break:
Yes probably agree on PopOS, even though never used it. Also their DE will need a lot of time, I hipenthey dont ship it too early. I dual boot it, actually the Fedora Atomic image.
Yes, Silverblue is the GNOME Atomic desktop but as I said it is not finished. There are many things not done.
Being in active development does not mean it’s not ready. To recognize faults or things that can be improved upon and keeping track of those does not mean it’s not ready.
By your definition, not a single distro is ready. Which, to be frank, is a perfectly fine stance to hold if the extent of this is explored and explained. However, you pose it as if Fedora Atomic is the one with that problem (implying others don’t have that issue), which is just plain false.
It is not false.
There is a workaround for updating the bootloader, but I often use “how well does it scale” as a measurement.
Atomic should replace traditional distros, and apart from the need for improved tooling everywhere (like easily converting random files to RPMs) it has the big issue that currently GRUB is not updated.
This means the system is not possible to keep installed over many versions, without tweaks. This will hopefully be fixed with bootupd integration in F41.
This means users with secureboot get issues on newer Kernels, if they installed Atomic a few versions back.
Here is the Atomic issue tracker and I would call a few dealbreakers, while not all.
What you’ve pointed out here is definitely something that should be fixed soon. Thank you for clarifying.
Your second monitor was not broken by Ubuntu. Your second monitor was no longer receiving a signal. The distinction is that the second monitor was functional but not compatible.
Yeah I’m seriously sensing there’s a massive bit of info we haven’t been given. I can’t even conjure up a way that a distro would “break” a monitor lol.
It works with Fedora, Windows and Macintosh. It worked with Ubuntu until a month ago. It doesn’t work with a fresh install of Ubuntu with default settings.
There, now you have all the same information I have.
It worked perfectly with Ubuntu until recently. It worked perfectly with Windows and Macintosh. It worked perfectly with Fedora.
It didn’t work with a fresh install of Ubuntu and several other distros in the same family.
Now I know what you’re about to say- you’re about to say it could have worked if I had only X Y or Z. But that’s not my point.
My point is that newbies don’t want to troubleshoot everything.
Generally Fedora’s purpose is to make sure nothing gets into redhat (RHEL) Linux. So if there are breaking changes to things, you’ll be getting them.
Historically if people had wanted to learn I’d push them towards Ubuntu because its Debian based, meaning familiar enough to most of what runs the modern internet that I could eventually (I’m not a Linux admin) fix.
These days if you just want to use it I’d pick Linux mint, just since they seem to be orienting towards that way. Arch or SUSE based something if you want to learn more about how the packages you install work together. But the choice in distro honestly feels more like an installer and package manager choice than anything. a distro is just a choice of which thousand things to hide in a trenchcoat.
I just ideologically don’t like IBM and would rather hand in my bug reports to the volunteer ecosystem.
So if there are breaking changes to things, you’ll be getting them.
No, Fedora has a policy against compatibility breaking updates mid-cycle. That’s why Gnome is never updated to a new major release on a Fedora release. You’ll have to wait for the next Fedora release to come out for such upgrades.
I didn’t mean to imply they’d roll in buggy packages, by virtue of release; just that Fedora’s function is typically regression testing for the money making product.
The testing is for the much more marketable enterprise window.
And not only did everything “just work” flawlessly, but it’s so much faster and more polished than I ever knew Linux to be!
Congrats, you are very lucky. But try to survive couple of version upgrades before recommending it to noobs.
Years ago major upgrades and to lesser degree even minor upgrades made me to give up trying to keep installation running. I don’t even remember if it was Red Hat or Debian.
Eventually I realized, that I like running newest version of Desktop and I ran into cases of getting frustrated with lack of newer versions, which had fixes for issues I ran into. Then I realized that best wiki was not a snapshot distribution.
In the end I tried rolling distribution and remain happy for years.
Debian or derived distribution is easiest to get google help for and it is the simplest choice for me, when running on the cloud.
Although, Alpine is pushing through containers quite forcefully.
I’ve been running Fedora OStree variants for over two years. I version upgraded and rebased between entirely different spins, rawhide and over to ublue variants then back to fedora mainline. All off the original install, keeping my userspace intact. Never once has it self destructed.
