Besides size and looks, nowadays is there any significant differences between distros that might make one "better" than the other?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 2 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

The difference between them is becoming less relevant but most of what you want from a distro are good defaults and stability. Some people don't want to have to make 100 changes every time they download a distro to tune it to one specific task, so you have distros like Nobara which is tuned for gaming and productivity, distros like Endeavor which are Arch-based but with a ton of things set up for you, distros like ZorinOS which are tuned specifically to be beginner-friendly and have helpful popups, etc.

I think it could be argued that most distros out there now are "just Debian/Arch but with [thing]" but I still think the distro choice is important to people who don't like messing with their system and want things to just work.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I still think the distro choice is important to people who don't like messing with their system and want things to just work.

    I'd argue the reverse is true as well:

    Distro choice is important for people who enjoy messing with their system and want to meticulously set up every piece.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments