Give me a distro recommendation other than Arch (using Arch right now and I hate it)...

Give me a distro recommendation other than Arch (using Arch right now and I hate it). If you recommend me Gentoo I'll just install sabayon. So gimme a real good honest distro and your reasons why.

Fedora because it's productive and amazing

>loonix is so bad people feel the need to distro hop hoping to find the perfect one

Also, if you don;t compile it yourself you're no better than a wangblows or apple user

what are you using, (((free)))bsd?

The new Ubuntu. Just customize it a bit to make it look better.

There's literally no reason to use any other distro, I'm not even baiting.

It depends on your needs. Do you want a complete OS that works well out of the box and comes with a lot of preinstalled tools and tweaks? Go with MX Linux 16. Do you want something that simply works and that you can customize the way you want with no hassles? Go Xubuntu 16.04. Do you want a totally free environment that doesn't allow proprietary software and it still looks pleasing and works decently? Go with Trisquel.

Nice post, will take it on board, looking into MX Linux now. I'd use Trisquel but I'm stuck with propietary wireless and cba buying a free-as-in-freedom wifi card.

Why do you hate Arch? I also didn't like it, but it's been a couple years. I recommend Fedora/Ubuntu if your a Foss guy go Fedora if you don't really give a rats go Ubuntu.

MX Linux has received a lot of good opinions recently. The default DE is XFCE.

go to sleep uncle chang

Done become redhats bitch with fedora.

Get Debian or opensuse if you want to actually be productive

not a fan of the default repositories, they're missing a lot of stuff
not too hard to remedy/deal with but whatever

Manjaro

Fedora. It just werks, and DNF is pretty fucking cool.

Debian stable.

It is stable and just werks, since I do not care for bleeding edge software it is all I need.

Is there any reason for choosing Linux Mint over Ubuntu? And is there any reason to use Xubuntu instead of a net install of Ubuntu and selecting xfce as a DE?

I'm on Mint xfce right now but I fucked something up so I'm reformatting soon.

>Is there any reason for choosing Linux Mint over Ubuntu?
No. Mint works the same way as Ubuntu , but i's more bloated due to Cinnamon.
>And is there any reason to use Xubuntu instead of a net install of Ubuntu and selecting xfce as a DE?
Yes, two reasons: less bloat and fewer things to set and eliminate.
>I'm on Mint xfce right now but I fucked something up so I'm reformatting soon.
My absolute best recommendations for anyone wanting a good, working and efficient distro OOTB are these: Both MX Linux and Xubuntu natively run on XFCE, which is the currently best compromise between good performance, customizability, look and resources' usage.
Trsiquel comes in three different versions: stock one comes with Gnome 3 (but it's not as bloated as new Ubuntu); light one, called Mini, comes with LXDE; then the third version is for education and runs on an even lighter environment.
Pick your poison.

do you want your distro to just werk? do you want to rice? do you want to rice and your distro to just werk?

Honestly I'd say Fedora or BunsenLabs.

In the long run I've found that shit like Arch and Gentoo is way too much work for someone who isn't full sperg that has other stuff in their life to do and needs an OS that is stable and can update without messing up. But I admit Gentoo ect. is fun as hell to play around with and is also a very good way to learn about the inner workings of Linux.

>memedora

Devuan. using it right now with mate and it's noticeably snappier and I'm guessing it's like that because there is no systemd bloat =)

OpenSUSE Tumbleweed if you want bleeding edge. Although desu I'd rather stay with Arch.

alpine
it's what you want
arch without bullshit.

install gentoo

>using Arch right now and I hate it
To be fair, you have to have a very high IQ to be able to use Arch. The distro is extremely bleeding-edge, and without a solid grasp of Unix principles most of the benefits will go over a typical user's head. There's also Arch's minimal package manager, which is deftly woven into the system- the minimalistic philosophy draws heavily from CRUX, for instance. Arch users understand this stuff; they have the intellectual capacity to truly appreciate the benefits of pacman, to realise that it's not just minimal- it says something deep about LIFE. As a consequence people who dislike Arch truly ARE idiots- of course they wouldn't appreciate, for instance, the humour in pacman's tendency to break your entire system, which itself is a cryptic reference to Linus Torvald's epic "WE DO NOT BREAK USERSPACE!". I'm smirking right now just imagining one of those addlepated simpletons scratching their heads in confusion as Judd Vinet's genius wit unfolds itself on their screens. What fools.. how I pity them.

And yes, by the way, i DO have an Arch tattoo. And no, you cannot see it. It's for the ladies' eyes only- and even then they have to demonstrate that they're within 5 IQ points of my own (preferably lower) beforehand. Nothin personnel kid

Use Fedora with XFCE. It's the only way, user.

How old are Devuan packages compared to Debian Stable? I have read they are too old, but dunno if they are trolling or not. If they are the same, I think Devuan could be my comfy distro since no systemd.

Goddamnit! MX Linux has been praised here so frequently over the past few months that I'm gonna try it as soon as 17 comes out!

You should! It's been approved by Sup Forums !

give me an incentive to do any of this