Just curious because Distrowatch can be easily gamed; does anyone know how this might affect the linux consumer market?
I’m using Mint and see no reason to switch to this. I used to nerd out about different distros but aside from the enterprise distros or Debian or Arch preferences I don’t see why people are using smaller distros anymore. Hobbyist i guess?
mainly hobbyists or some very specific feature. For example antiX for old hardware or Spiral Linux for the better installer, gaming specific distros for gaming etc. Also there are protest distros which advertise not having something - usually SystemD.
Thanks for de-influencing me out of switching to KDE plasma, mint and ubuntu are the only distros I’ve tried and I’ve been thinking about trying something new
New users (like me) that aren’t necessarily passionate about linux and just looking for a windows alternative can be easily persuaded early on
Arch is a make it yourself distro. It comes barebones and you install what you need (which in my opinion gives better knowledge about your system). And the packages are up-to-date which is good if you are gaming.
If you don’t like to tinker then Arch may not be for you. Something arch-based could be a better fit. Like Garuda or EndeavourOS.
When you say you can install what you need, what does that mean exactly? Does that mean things like lib C or vulkan or drivers so my USB ports work? Seems to me like I don’t actually understand how a computer works at a fundamental level when I’ve never had to configure a sound card or manually install a driver and the explanations I get are too technical to practically apply
I’d like to understand my PC well enough to use Arch but I’m finding a hard time figuring out what I’m missing exactly. Practically speaking, what does direct X or vulkan do?
When it comes to Arch the wiki is your friend. It will tell you if additional configuration is required to get your packages working and what other dependencies can be installed. If something isn’t working properly then the wiki probably knows why.
Arch comes with no drivers and additional packages by default. You need to install them manually. But you don’t need to install every package for your system manually. If you need glibc it will most certainly get pulled down as a dependency.
You don’t need to know every part of the system to use arch but you need to be interested enough to learn how your system works if something is not working or you want to configure your system in a certain way.
For starters I would recommend going with something Arch-based like Garuda or EndeavorOS if you want to learn Arch. I started off with my Steam Deck and later Garuda on my desktop. Once I was comfortable enough around Arch I decided to install vanilla Arch (manually, the wiki way) in a VM. When installing my system I wrote down every command I used and from that it snowballed in to my own install script for arch. That taught me a lot.
Do you know what the issue was? Iam on kubuntu with the flatpak version (important) of lutris and battle.net + sc2 just runs out of the box. With a normal installation of lutris it didn’t.
Kept telling me I was missing Vulkan and lib C (I this k) and I kept installing it wrong somehow. Eventually I downloaded steam and ran one game (potion craft) and it installed everything I needed automatically, lutris worked just fine after that
I too bashed my head with lutris on some games to the point that i gave up on Linux. Then i tried it again but this time using Bottles and it’s working really fine for me, almost flawless.
Did you try lutris out of flatpak? I don’t know why but this version has less issues.
I compared lutris vs bottles and for me the performance of bottles was way worse. (Sadly). Because the bottles ui is much better
My switch to Linux started 1,5 years ago with Manjaro KDE - and since then, I am still a fan of KDE, which is kind of “Windows UI done right” for me. Ergonomic, configurable, consistent. I also find Pantheon, Enlightenment, and Budgie to be cool concepts, but from a practical side, KDE is a no-brainer for me.
Mint comes with Cinnamon by default, and I guess that’s what you’re using. For me, Cinnamon is too old-fashioned, it’s like you’re back to at least Windows 7 timing. Some people like it, but for me it’s just old and out of touch with the progress of UI’s.
GNOME used in Ubuntu is good with app theming (yay for adwaita!), it is unique and minimalistic, but its overall design is just…not for everyone, and customization is heavily tied to unsafe practice of plugins which has been exploited many, many times.
With all that said, try everything out in a VM or something and see what’s good for you. There are really no wrong choices!
Personally using the latter, appears to have the best support and more configuration options compared to alternatives, as well as advanced options like GPU passthrough etc, though it has a bit more of a learning curve, and each alternative option should be fine.
Just curious because Distrowatch can be easily gamed; does anyone know how this might affect the linux consumer market? I’m using Mint and see no reason to switch to this. I used to nerd out about different distros but aside from the enterprise distros or Debian or Arch preferences I don’t see why people are using smaller distros anymore. Hobbyist i guess?
mainly hobbyists or some very specific feature. For example antiX for old hardware or Spiral Linux for the better installer, gaming specific distros for gaming etc. Also there are protest distros which advertise not having something - usually SystemD.
Thanks for de-influencing me out of switching to KDE plasma, mint and ubuntu are the only distros I’ve tried and I’ve been thinking about trying something new
New users (like me) that aren’t necessarily passionate about linux and just looking for a windows alternative can be easily persuaded early on
Looks like there’s still something you can try, brother.
After bashing my face against the wall getting lutris to run StarCraft 2, I’m avoiding looking at my OS too hard
I feel like I should try arch just once so I understand the memes
deleted by creator
Arch is a make it yourself distro. It comes barebones and you install what you need (which in my opinion gives better knowledge about your system). And the packages are up-to-date which is good if you are gaming.
If you don’t like to tinker then Arch may not be for you. Something arch-based could be a better fit. Like Garuda or EndeavourOS.
When you say you can install what you need, what does that mean exactly? Does that mean things like lib C or vulkan or drivers so my USB ports work? Seems to me like I don’t actually understand how a computer works at a fundamental level when I’ve never had to configure a sound card or manually install a driver and the explanations I get are too technical to practically apply
I’d like to understand my PC well enough to use Arch but I’m finding a hard time figuring out what I’m missing exactly. Practically speaking, what does direct X or vulkan do?
When it comes to Arch the wiki is your friend. It will tell you if additional configuration is required to get your packages working and what other dependencies can be installed. If something isn’t working properly then the wiki probably knows why.
Arch comes with no drivers and additional packages by default. You need to install them manually. But you don’t need to install every package for your system manually. If you need glibc it will most certainly get pulled down as a dependency.
You don’t need to know every part of the system to use arch but you need to be interested enough to learn how your system works if something is not working or you want to configure your system in a certain way.
For starters I would recommend going with something Arch-based like Garuda or EndeavorOS if you want to learn Arch. I started off with my Steam Deck and later Garuda on my desktop. Once I was comfortable enough around Arch I decided to install vanilla Arch (manually, the wiki way) in a VM. When installing my system I wrote down every command I used and from that it snowballed in to my own install script for arch. That taught me a lot.
Alright I’ll give it a try, can you recommend a VM other than virtual box? I was having issues with dependencies when installing it
I am using qemu with virt-manager gui and it works well
There are better ways than using Lutris
Can I run an installer off a mounted iso in a bottle?
Yes
Do you know what the issue was? Iam on kubuntu with the flatpak version (important) of lutris and battle.net + sc2 just runs out of the box. With a normal installation of lutris it didn’t.
Kept telling me I was missing Vulkan and lib C (I this k) and I kept installing it wrong somehow. Eventually I downloaded steam and ran one game (potion craft) and it installed everything I needed automatically, lutris worked just fine after that
I too bashed my head with lutris on some games to the point that i gave up on Linux. Then i tried it again but this time using Bottles and it’s working really fine for me, almost flawless.
Yeah I think it’s time to stop being lazy and actually learn how wine works, I can’t get Warcraft 3 to work
Did you try lutris out of flatpak? I don’t know why but this version has less issues. I compared lutris vs bottles and for me the performance of bottles was way worse. (Sadly). Because the bottles ui is much better
I didn’t try that version, I just transitioned to Bottles. I didn’t notice any performance loss though I might compare it just to see what it’s like.
I still wonder what the difference made. I would image, it should be the same.
My switch to Linux started 1,5 years ago with Manjaro KDE - and since then, I am still a fan of KDE, which is kind of “Windows UI done right” for me. Ergonomic, configurable, consistent. I also find Pantheon, Enlightenment, and Budgie to be cool concepts, but from a practical side, KDE is a no-brainer for me.
Mint comes with Cinnamon by default, and I guess that’s what you’re using. For me, Cinnamon is too old-fashioned, it’s like you’re back to at least Windows 7 timing. Some people like it, but for me it’s just old and out of touch with the progress of UI’s.
GNOME used in Ubuntu is good with app theming (yay for adwaita!), it is unique and minimalistic, but its overall design is just…not for everyone, and customization is heavily tied to unsafe practice of plugins which has been exploited many, many times.
With all that said, try everything out in a VM or something and see what’s good for you. There are really no wrong choices!
I totally forgot about using a VM, can you recommend one besides virtualbox?
VMWare, GNOME Boxes, QEMU+virt-manager
Personally using the latter, appears to have the best support and more configuration options compared to alternatives, as well as advanced options like GPU passthrough etc, though it has a bit more of a learning curve, and each alternative option should be fine.