What’s with all the Mint hype? I’ve never used it and have little desire to go back to a Ubuntu-based distro. Just curious why everyone loves it so much.
Even if you can configure your way through Arch to a killer custom system, is that really what you want to do every time on every computer in your life?
Getting my first computer up wasn’t too bad - really no more time to configure it than anything else, and you can just toss your packages to a a text file and your dotfikes to GitHub. Didn’t take long at all to get my second computer set up
I just spun up a HTPC on Debian 12+XFCE. It “wasn’t too bad” but it really was more time to configure it than under Ubuntu. Totally worth it, to me. With XFCE I’m getting the desktop I want, not the desktop Gnome thinks I should have. I have the features I want, and any feature I don’t want is easily banished.
But, I must admit, getting to that final further from perfect Ubuntu/Gnome configuration probably took 1/4 as many “tech flex lifts” in vanilla Ubuntu as the Debian+XFCE install took. For Debian, I had to get sudo working for my default account - which involved a “su root” and otherwise running some programs directly out of /usr/sbin - easy stuff, when you know how. I also had to configure for auto-login with more than a simple checkbox in the installer process. The XFCE launcher panel configuration is “powerful” - meaning: more hands on. Then there’s an annoying XFCE trait that I finally figured out, something about when the EDID connection glitches you get spurious “Monitor Settings” dialogs popping up. I forget if it was that one, or something else, but when I was trying to configure the dialog properly, one of the tabs wasn’t showing until I resized the dialog window bigger - something that seemed like it shouldn’t be necessary but definitely was because I looked all over for that configuration option, didn’t see it due to the “hidden” tab issue, and finally got a clue from a blog post mentioning the need to resize the window to get to it… Canonical does polish off more of those rough edges, in Gnome. Then they make you wait for snap update activity by default - I’ll polish my own rough edges, thanks.
For the most part, it works well without needing too much tinkering by the user. It’s the Fisher Price My First Distro.
I tried it out with a 21.3 dualboot with Windows 11 and within 2 or 3 months I hadn’t gone back to Windows other than to push files over. Sure, there were a few “learning opportunities” with tweaks or weird driver issues that were because of the particular hardware I’m using, but they were manageable. At this point I’m running 22.1 only on this machine.
The nice part is that being Ubuntu-based, if I run into a problem, I can search for both the more widely-documented Ubuntu version of the issue, or look for a Mint-related version. Claude does a great job with small-to-medium troubleshooting rather than me dig through forums. It’s low-risk, low-work, high-reward.
Calling it a “Fischer Price” distro is a little patronizing. I’m a seasoned Linux user and I use Mint for work because I just want something that works when my paycheck is on the line. Mint has never broken on me and always works.
Slight sarcasm - I’m also a Mint user, and it was like a recursive reference to this meme from forever ago. Maybe it was too specific and dated, but the point is that since Macs were so easy to use, the Windows people back in the 8.1 days treated Mac users like kindergartners as they paid for their $1,000 facebook machines (also a meme from that time).
All the “Yeah, I use Arch, BTW” people that love the struggle and the hobbyist tweaks of their distros seem to look down on Mint users because it doesn’t require a struggle to use Mint. I used to see it all the time when I first jumped over to Linux.
I ran it for a while, and loved it. Cinnamon is sleek and feels polished. The installation is really fast and not bloated with garbage software.
Everything generally works, and the interface feels familiar.
It is Ubuntu/Debian under the hood, so compatibility with most software is good. Bleeding edge drivers may run into issues, but most of them work with a little fiddling.
It’s worth a try. If nothing else toss it on a USB drive and give it a test drive.
I ran Ubuntu for like 15 years and was especially recently getting frustrated by how far behind the packages always were. I’m full in on Arch - everything about it has been a much better experience.
After 15 years, aren’t you questioning: how far out on the bleeding edge do I need to be?
I mean, if the absolute most advanced bleeding edge is “where it was at” five years ago - isn’t a stable system that’s up to speed with where the good things were five years ago even better?
That’s one of the beauties of Linux, if you need something else than want you can probably get another distro that suits your needs.
OP was asking about newbies.
I set up Mint for my mom. I can guarantee that she won’t change.
The good thing about distro hopping is refining your setup to the point that “burning down the desktop” becomes a relative non-event, your important personal files are elsewhere - nothing of value gets lost if your desktop SSD goes Ollie North: “I’m sorry, sir, I don’t recall…”
It’s rock solid and the desktop is very close to what people coming from Windows would expect. It’s just a very good beginner distro, not necessarily something that more advanced users would choose.
Makes sense. I went from Suse to Mepis, stuck with it for a bit after they transitioned to Ubuntu before just going full Ubuntu, but I was getting frustrated by how long it took for their repos to catch up. I’ve been on Arch for a year or two now and it’s been fantastic.
What’s with all the Mint hype? I’ve never used it and have little desire to go back to a Ubuntu-based distro. Just curious why everyone loves it so much.
Mint is easy. Easy is good.
Even if you can configure your way through Arch to a killer custom system, is that really what you want to do every time on every computer in your life?
Getting my first computer up wasn’t too bad - really no more time to configure it than anything else, and you can just toss your packages to a a text file and your dotfikes to GitHub. Didn’t take long at all to get my second computer set up
I just spun up a HTPC on Debian 12+XFCE. It “wasn’t too bad” but it really was more time to configure it than under Ubuntu. Totally worth it, to me. With XFCE I’m getting the desktop I want, not the desktop Gnome thinks I should have. I have the features I want, and any feature I don’t want is easily banished.
But, I must admit, getting to that final further from perfect Ubuntu/Gnome configuration probably took 1/4 as many “tech flex lifts” in vanilla Ubuntu as the Debian+XFCE install took. For Debian, I had to get sudo working for my default account - which involved a “su root” and otherwise running some programs directly out of /usr/sbin - easy stuff, when you know how. I also had to configure for auto-login with more than a simple checkbox in the installer process. The XFCE launcher panel configuration is “powerful” - meaning: more hands on. Then there’s an annoying XFCE trait that I finally figured out, something about when the EDID connection glitches you get spurious “Monitor Settings” dialogs popping up. I forget if it was that one, or something else, but when I was trying to configure the dialog properly, one of the tabs wasn’t showing until I resized the dialog window bigger - something that seemed like it shouldn’t be necessary but definitely was because I looked all over for that configuration option, didn’t see it due to the “hidden” tab issue, and finally got a clue from a blog post mentioning the need to resize the window to get to it… Canonical does polish off more of those rough edges, in Gnome. Then they make you wait for snap update activity by default - I’ll polish my own rough edges, thanks.
For the most part, it works well without needing too much tinkering by the user. It’s the Fisher Price My First Distro.
I tried it out with a 21.3 dualboot with Windows 11 and within 2 or 3 months I hadn’t gone back to Windows other than to push files over. Sure, there were a few “learning opportunities” with tweaks or weird driver issues that were because of the particular hardware I’m using, but they were manageable. At this point I’m running 22.1 only on this machine.
The nice part is that being Ubuntu-based, if I run into a problem, I can search for both the more widely-documented Ubuntu version of the issue, or look for a Mint-related version. Claude does a great job with small-to-medium troubleshooting rather than me dig through forums. It’s low-risk, low-work, high-reward.
Calling it a “Fischer Price” distro is a little patronizing. I’m a seasoned Linux user and I use Mint for work because I just want something that works when my paycheck is on the line. Mint has never broken on me and always works.
Slight sarcasm - I’m also a Mint user, and it was like a recursive reference to this meme from forever ago. Maybe it was too specific and dated, but the point is that since Macs were so easy to use, the Windows people back in the 8.1 days treated Mac users like kindergartners as they paid for their $1,000 facebook machines (also a meme from that time).
All the “Yeah, I use Arch, BTW” people that love the struggle and the hobbyist tweaks of their distros seem to look down on Mint users because it doesn’t require a struggle to use Mint. I used to see it all the time when I first jumped over to Linux.
Exactly! I’ve been using a laptop with Mint for school for more than 5 years and I’ve had no problems with it
That being said, I also haven’t had any problems with my TV PC running Fedora, or my fileserver running Ubuntu either, so… 🤷
I ran it for a while, and loved it. Cinnamon is sleek and feels polished. The installation is really fast and not bloated with garbage software.
Everything generally works, and the interface feels familiar.
It is Ubuntu/Debian under the hood, so compatibility with most software is good. Bleeding edge drivers may run into issues, but most of them work with a little fiddling.
It’s worth a try. If nothing else toss it on a USB drive and give it a test drive.
I ran Ubuntu for like 15 years and was especially recently getting frustrated by how far behind the packages always were. I’m full in on Arch - everything about it has been a much better experience.
What’s made Arch better for you?
For me it’s been the availability of packages, and how up-to-date things are. The AUR is a gamechanger.
After 15 years, aren’t you questioning: how far out on the bleeding edge do I need to be?
I mean, if the absolute most advanced bleeding edge is “where it was at” five years ago - isn’t a stable system that’s up to speed with where the good things were five years ago even better?
That’s one of the beauties of Linux, if you need something else than want you can probably get another distro that suits your needs. OP was asking about newbies. I set up Mint for my mom. I can guarantee that she won’t change.
My son on the other hand distro hops.
The good thing about distro hopping is refining your setup to the point that “burning down the desktop” becomes a relative non-event, your important personal files are elsewhere - nothing of value gets lost if your desktop SSD goes Ollie North: “I’m sorry, sir, I don’t recall…”
It’s rock solid and the desktop is very close to what people coming from Windows would expect. It’s just a very good beginner distro, not necessarily something that more advanced users would choose.
Makes sense. I went from Suse to Mepis, stuck with it for a bit after they transitioned to Ubuntu before just going full Ubuntu, but I was getting frustrated by how long it took for their repos to catch up. I’ve been on Arch for a year or two now and it’s been fantastic.
It’s fantastically simple to set up, and it’s (well it’s linux!) fantastically powerful out of the box.
Easy peasy, just go. No need to fiddle to get it starting, good looking, and everything is there ready to be used.
Maybe all distros are like that today but they sure wasn’t (even Mint wasn’t before IDK maybe 18 IMO).
It just works.