Which Linux distro do you dislike and why?

Which Linux distro do you dislike and why?

>linux

Fedora and Redhat

Literal shills

I don't like nor dislike any Lincucks distro because I don't use that trash.

Debian:

Really old packages, testing branches still have old packages AND you now have poorer quality assurance.

Ubuntu:

Installs Amazon spyware, Debian base.

Sabayon:

Gentoo for retards

Anything not rolling release.

I don't want my programs to be from the last century thank you very much.

tails OS

Ubuntu
>why?
They developed Unity instead of either making their own GNOME2 fork or using someone else's

not him but I like the classic desktop look, not the my desktops a phone look

The one that didn't spoonfeed me with the wireless support after installing. Debian-senpai, I am soo sorry...

...

>Literally anything else

When booting into Fedora,,, I'm home.

Mint irritates me..

>Installs amazon spyware
How is life in 2014 user?

Debian because apt-get is shit and its the basis for every garbage throwaway distro out there

>debian is bad because retards use it as a base instead of doing something ontheir own
What?
Arch because of the toxic retarded community. They talk about how minimal arch is while in reality it is more bloated than ubuntu, they pretend it's the kiss philosophy every time you point out something stupid like using the most bloated kernel possible by default, not separating free, contrib and nonfree packages in any way or removing an installer.

All of them.
Because they're linux, and linux is an OS to use as a hobby in and of itself, not an OS to use for something that actually works.

Then explain webservers.

I'm dual booting debian and windows 10 on my desktop (even though I'm spending most of my time in 10 because I'm lazy) and honestly I sorta agree. Not for the reasons of apt-get though (especially since aptitude exists) but moreso because I think Linux really shines as a rolling release platform. I've been using arch for a while on my laptop, and it runs beautifully. The only HARD part was the installation. (And a few issues with MATE that I couldn't fix except by reinstalling arch entirely. Weirdest shit but it was when I first installed so something was wrong.)

Even if the arch community is pretentious as most people think, they are still helpful. Probably the most helpful community in computing imo. Arch wiki is a crown jewel of computing, and a lot of the shit in arch that werks doesn't come about just because somebody is shilling. The AUR is fucking magic to me, because a lot of those packages I have to build myself on debian, and a few I can't even do shit with because I can't compile from source to save my life.

Never had a "oh update broke everything!" deal with arch.

I've had many with buntu and debian has come with a few stupid problems due to the way packages are handled. (AMD drivers aren't even in the testing repo currently, nor the SID repo.)

A kernel won't get you far obviously, but if you pair it with gnu and things like X it is actually very practical. You should try it sometime.

I run OpenSUSE on my server, and it has never given me a single issue.

For everyday use, I just use whatever. It doesn't matter to me, because as long as it's GNU/Linux, it'll do basically the same shit after I set up Xmonad, ssh, and git.

I used to use Arch, then moved to Gentoo, then Slackware for about a week before I realized I didn't even care about looking cool on the internet anymore.

Debian is shit though. APT is such an awful pile of garbage. Absolute torture to work with / 10. It's harder to use than just not having a package manager.

I dislike them all not because of Linux, but because of GNU. GNU may be the greatest manifestation of autistic mental deficiencies that has ever been seen on Earth.

debian because it's named after some cuck's waifu
fedora because it's a meme name

Please don't talk about things you don't understand. The AUR is just a git wrapper, you can use the pkgbuilds on literally any distro (and there is a nifty packaging tool called checkinstall that you probably never heard of, look it up).
Debian has a rolling release version, and it is very similar to arch in terms of "muh bleeding edge" and still has very few amounts of problems.
AMDs FOSS drivers make more sense to use on a rolling and a stable release platform, and if someone really has the need to install fglrx they can do so, it is not hard.
The arch community will tell you to use something else or not use something instead of helping you to fix it.
And installing arch isn't hard, literally anyone that has the ability to follow basic instructions can do it.

Debi an stable. Most people have no idea why they want the latest and greatest, other than its a higher number. I like to install once, not fuck with it, and have it be rock solid dependable. I don't care if the package is older if it works as well or better than "current' versions.

Yfw unity is a gnome 3 fork

I use Arch Linux, because I like to actually know how my system works.

And how does it work? Tell me about them syscalls.

FUCK OFF WINKEK
I DONT NEED TO TELL SCUM LIKE YOU

I agree, arch with a debian-like installer would rekt but maybe it exists ? Does anyone know ?

>asks about an assembly instruction
>accuses user of being a winkek
typical lincuck like the majority of Sup Forums

What if you have touchscreen laptop? Then it makes sense.

i think it was a joke. but the fact that you can't tell tells a lot about the arch community.
arch had an installer once. and why would you want arch?

Manjaro.

Speaking of. That's the one I hate. I went from arch to Manjaro to fedora.

Rolling release + Good customizing + Not having to compile everything from source

so basically debian sid?

LOL Arch teaches you how your system works. Fucking golden meme m8y

Debian
- Least stable
- Old buggy ass packages
- Shitty community full of pompus retards who shit up communities and constantly make and post comics calling Ubuntu for noobs, and Arch for hacker wannabes. (Compensation much?)
- Has no known benefits over any other distro, yet calls itself universal

Potentially

Architect linux. Debian-like installer, installs pristine arch system just like if you spent an hour copy wiki commands from your phone.

Ubuntu and all its derivatives. Broken pieces of shit. Legitly considering them MS+Apple piece to fuck up Linux reputation.

>>- Least stable
bait

1 and 2 are wrong. 3 is correct. 4 shows you are a fucking retard.

Thanks based user !
And lol that's exactly what I did each time I installed arch

Wayland,busybox,lynx

Ubuntu because it never changes, yet gets worse every update. In practical terms, all of them except Chrome OS.

Mint

run by kids for kids. They only just figured out what signing is, and the first thing they choose to use is MD5.

They have absolutely no clue about security, which is evident by their distribution sites being hacked multiple times per year.

The distro itself is just a sad joke, essentially a preconfigured ubuntu. Why bother using it when you can just use ubuntu and get actual security updates etc.?

I get triggered whenever I see this shitty fucking doujin being memed around.
ShindoL is trash, and the fact that cucks actually give him money on patreon is a euphemism to how fucked people are.

They are a fucking joke behind the scenes. It's amazing what they purely don't know and trying to dev for them is simultaneously and exercise in frustration and like watching down's syndrome infected cartoon clowns trying to develop a distro.

busybox is not very practical in desktop use in my experience. these work fine. my point is that a kernel won't get you far, and busybox, wayland and lynx are not a kernel. (why the hell is lynx on your list? it doesn't make sense)

why?

Ditch stock Linux Gnoo for Chrome OS. Chroem OS is a major improvement

I can't stand where Ubuntu is going, but it has some positives by "merging" with windows dev could make better drivers and programs to Linux and port programs.

archbang. because its too easy to install so it takes away my feeling like a special butterfly because I run arch.

...

Arch

The type people that use it.

ElementaryOS, for obvious reasons

daily reminder that this is the average arch user

>fedora
>red hat

Enjoy your NSA

Are you referring to SELinux?

Emergence still pains me

Debian and derivatives.
dpkg is way too fucking slow.

none
I like all
maybe I hate openSuse

>using the internet

Enjoy yours.

>Likes Debian, Arch, and Ubuntu
>Dislikes OpenSUSE
Where did they touch you?

IMO the only thing linux needs is a good control panel like the classic windows one.
I'm done messing with command lines and config files. If i need a guide to change the mouse speed it's too complicated, so fuck it. Proof: I neved needed a guide for a windows configuration ever since the 9x days

Which being?
I know a guy who was an ElementaryOS dev. Said that they basically tried to make Ubuntu usable, and almost succeeded. He left when it became obvious that Ubuntu's choices can't be fixed save for remaking half of it, which was too much of a chore.

>preferring GUI over config files
Maybe you should stick to Windows

use KDE if you like bullshit this much.

Fuck you

>Debian
"stable" packages
>Arch
muh haxxor OS for edgy 1337 scriptz kiddiz
>Gentoo
waste of energy