notes:distro_comparisons
This is an old revision of the document!
Table of Contents
Notes
- The following list contains various distros (and Windows), along with what I like and don't like about them
- This is my experiences below; YMMV
Fedora Workstation
Good
- Secure (SELinux, up-to-date packages)
- GNOME
- Anaconda (installer allows me to set software RAID0 easily with GUI and allows for root/boot XFS filesystem)
Bad
- SELinux is annoying on servers
- KeePassXC takes a few seconds longer to open a database file
Conclusions
- Works nicely
- Primary OS
openSUSE Tumbleweed
Good
- Rolling
- GNOME
- Installer (allows for root/boot XFS filesystem)
- AppArmor isn't annoying
- Wine packages (standard, staging, standard with nine, staging with nine)
- Yast is nice for configuring the network on servers
Bad
- Keybase is awkward to install 1)
- PackageKit is super annoying (it doesn't honor trying to gracefully quit it)
- Repo priority and vendor changes is strange, and feels like a bit of blind trust when it comes to using any of the Packman repos
- GNOME comes with a lot of unnecessary software
- LLVM version (as of 2018/12/05) is still 6.0.1
Conclusions
- TODO
Ubuntu
Good
- Good package selection
- Plenty of repos (PPAs)
- Bleeding-edge graphics stack available (oibaf or padokaPPA)
- Different kernel options available (xanmod, liquorix, official mainline packages)
- Minimal Install option
Bad
- None
Conclusions
- TODO
Xubuntu
Good
- Lightweight
- Color schemes are nice
Bad
- Bad HiDPI support
Conclusions
- Meh
Ubuntu MATE
Good
- Lightweight
Bad
- Default color scheme is meh (could just change it, but whatever)
- The panels have varying degrees of problems when switching the compositor (Compiz causes weird stuff)
Conclusions
- Meh
Arch Linux
Good
- Rolling (enough anyway)
- Can use F2FS
Bad
- Behind openSUSE TW with some packages (took em forever to get GNOME 3.24 and other popular software, which is weird for a distro highly praised for being rolling)
- Installations are tedious (I reinstall frequently; doing everything manually “The Arch Way” is hassle)
- Mandatory access controls are a PITA to install and maintain if using the NVIDIA proprietary driver (not a problem on other distros)
Conclusions
- Arch is a ton of hassle with no real benefits over openSUSE TW
- Not worth using
Solus
Good
- Rolling (mostly)
- Lightweight (Budgie does the opposite of what GNOME does for compositing)
- Incredibly fast start and shutdown
Bad
- Xorg took forever to upgrade to 1.19 (they claimed problems with 1.19, but every other mainstream distro used it just fine for months)
- Keybase isn't installable (no package for it, and compiling it is out of the question)
- Wine isn't Staging (they claim Staging is problematic; Staging has more fixes than regular Wine, and Solus is too picky to package both)
Conclusions
- It's usable, but package update periods are unreliable, and overall packaging policies are awkward
- Not worth using
Windows
Good
- Good graphics support (namely with Optimus)
- Good for BIOS modding
Bad
- Microsoft spyware
- Windows Update (can't disable automatic updates without breaking WU)
- Deep settings are cryptic and require a lot of research on registry keys
- 3rd-party software needs to be manually updated with user-intervention
- Drivers also need to be manually updated (WU will download ancient years-old drivers if I allow it to handle drivers by itself)
- Intel SST drivers (Audio Controller and OED) are a total pain to get right
- Initial set-up takes a long time
- Windows 7 is a mess with updates and basically unusable without babysitting each individual update
- Little-to-no official documentation on various services and scheduled tasks; disabling some may work fine, or may cause random issues down the road
Conclusions
- Terrible OS; only bearable for quick gaming sessions and iTunes
1)
it's either use the officially-supported command-line version, or use the official repo without proper signing
/var/www/wiki/data/attic/notes/distro_comparisons.1544005913.txt.gz · Last modified: 2018/12/05 05:31 by Sean Rhone