How accurate is this?

How accurate is this?

Other urls found in this thread:

usesthis.com/interviews/jeff.dean/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Get off the computer Maximilian.

Anyone who sees this post, hide and leave this thread it's shit bait

its shit. Arch is not for servers, better go with red hat,centos or debian

Ubuntu is accurate doe

Saved

>Ubuntu is accurate doe

>how accurate is a distro comparison chart made by an archfag (or any other diehard distro shill for that matter) is?

You tell me doc.

>not using arch on your server
Enjoy not being the first to have your security vulnerabilities patched

Only Source Mage should be called 'the one'.

>debian
oh boy.

If it's not Ubuntu Debian or Fedora/red hat then it isn't worth using

100% of realism.

Shit chart.
You can do "real h4xx0r" stuff on any of the popular GNU/Linux distributions.

uh no
you can only do real h4xx0r stuff on kali

every single hacking tool installed on kali can be installed on any other distro

Arch is for NEETs who have no ambitions in life other than ricing out their anime desktop

>for servers
>debian
not with that punny lifecycle
actually, debian is fit for nothing at all
far too short lifecycle for servers
far too long lifecycle for desktop, on top of far too long freeze of unstable & testing

debian is shit tier, only fit for SJW mailing list drama
and anything more or less based upon debian thus is even worse

haven't touched arch for long, but erry time I looked at it, it was pure amateur shit flinging

centos for servers
fedora for desktops
specialized distros for specialized applications (eg libreelec)

that's an old pic. he's a Mac user.

>implying he can't use both

>I just want a system that just werks and feels familiar enough
ubuntu, fedora, mint, opensuse
>I need as little downtime as humanly possible
centos, debian
>I want the above but with a nice service plan
redhat
>I want to learn the platform and try every DE, WM, bootloader (etc) as easily as possible
arch
>I want to take the above even further
gentoo

every new pic of him shows him with Macs. draw your own conclusions.

conclusion: it's a faggot.

>implying using a mac is in any way shape or form worse than using windows
you're all cancer

it is, though
it means that on top of being tech illiterate, you're a cum dripping gapping fag

usesthis.com/interviews/jeff.dean/
Time to die macfag.

>implying using windows is in any way shape or form worse than using a mac
you're cancer

Who is he BTW?

usesthis.com/interviews/jeff.dean/

Linux Mint fits the bill for gaymes and noobs moreso than Ubuntu does.

Either way, OP is a fag. Outside of distros specifically for business-use that prioritize stability and use old packages: your distro really doesn't fucking matter and distro fanboys are really just a bunch of autists. You can basically do everything you can do on Distro X on Distro Y. The only difference is shit like Arch and Gentoo with installs that are literally nothing but a waste of time.

The only people that have time to waste defending their distro of choice *tips fedora* are people that don't do anything of worth on their computer. Any actual programmer that's worth anything would be using Ubuntu, somet Ubuntu-based distro, Fedora, macOS or Windows because everything else is pointless and they actually have work to do instead of wasting time ricing their waifu machine.

This distro war shit only became so prevalent after Sup Forums started thinking that installing Linux Mint or Arch was enough to make them post here. Think about it: any nitty-gritty core Sup Forums threads aren't as filled with cancer as distro threads.

KYS
Y
S

>Arch
>top-end server stuff

Just GTFO.

According to stack overflow, "Ubuntu is tops among them with 12.3% of the entire OS market for developers. Fedora, Mint, and Debian accounted for 1.4%, 1.7%, and 1.9% of all responses, respectively."
So the most common distribution among actual developers is Ubuntu.