So, Pick your poison and tell us why you pick it over the other

So, Pick your poison and tell us why you pick it over the other.

>Ubuntu v. Ubuntu based distro

Both garbage, mon amie.

ubuntu is used by professionals while mint is just a hobbyist distro that adds nothing to the table

They're both shit, both of their compositing solutions work awfully with web browsers.

> ubuntu is used by professionals [1] while mint is just a hobbyist distro that adds nothing to the table

[1] Editors Note: Professional used loosely in this context.

I don't use any of these, I use Ubuntu Blue Edition which is a Ubuntu based distro wich a blue theme.
I also have a partition wich Ubuntu Night Edition which is a Ubuntu based distro wich a dark theme.
I will make a thread called " Ubuntu Blue Edition VS Ubuntu Night Edition" and it will be a good thread.

Both bloat garbage.
I use arch btw

Do you mean Debian based distros?

This

No he means Linux based distro

I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as Linux,
is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux.
Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component
of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell
utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.

Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day,
without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU
which is widely used today is often called "Linux", and many of its users are
not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project.

There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a
part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system
that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run.
The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself;
it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is
normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system
is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called "Linux"
distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux.

You can't take vegan food, add meals, and then call it's vegan food

oh you know this meme you must be an oldfag...
hello oldfag !

>What you're referring to as Linux,is in fact, GNU/Linux
In fact I was referring to the kernel, stop opressing me with your GNU project Mr Stallman.

I'm terribly sorry for interjecting another moment, but what I just told you is GNU/Linux is, in fact, just Linux, or as I've just now taken to calling it, Just Linux. Linux apparently does happen to be a whole operating system unto itself and comprises a full OS as defined by POSIX.

Most computer users who run the entire Linux operating system every day already realize it. Through a peculiar turn of events, I was misled into calling the system "GNU/Linux", and until now, I was unaware that it is basically the Linux system, developed by the Linux project.

There really isn't a GNU/Linux, and I really wasn't using it; it is an extraneous misrepresentation of the system that's being used. Linux is the operating system: the entire system made useful by its included corelibs, shell utilities, and other vital system components. The kernel is already an integral part of the Linux operating system, never confined useless by itself; it functions coherently within the context of the complete Linux operating system. Linux is never used in combination with GNU accessories: the whole system is basically Linux without any GNU added, or Just Linux. All the so-called "GNU/Linux" distributions are really distributions of Linux.

Road to the years of Linux Desktop

>Linux or GNU/Linux ??
>Gnome or KDE ??
>Xorg or Wayland ??
>Debian or Arch ??
>RedHat or SUSE ??
>Vim or Emac ??


>fix missing driver

Ubuntu is good on servers, I never heard of Mint on servers
On desktop I see no difference between Ubuntu and Mint.
I think, Fedora or Arch are definitely better on desktop, imo

both are systemd trash however Ubuntu is more reliable than BrokenMint
I'd rather use openbsd for daily desktop use or ghostbsd. Arch is cucked but we still have the gold old Gentoo to save the day

Mint. It's basically Ubuntu with some added conveniences on top.

Cinnamon and MATE are more comfortable and more customizable than GNOME, and accommodate many people's workflow better.

Mint's update policies are nice for newbies, and the ability to switch between kernel branches with a few clicks is nice for experienced users.

Mint provides rolling updates of Firefox and Chromium. (Last I checked, Ubuntu just backported security patches instead of upgrading to a new major version.)

The default theme is nicer, once you switch to a color other than green.

The devs actually listen to user feedback.

Ubuntu's major advantages on the desktop were the HUD and the global menu, before they dropped Unity. Now, it just has slightly smoother animations.

Forgot one. Mint's forks of the GNOME apps preserve many features that GNOME has removed. For example, Nemo still has a tree panel, split view, folder colors and badges, type ahead find, and context menu plugins.

Solus to replace Mint?

Nobody asked, retard.

shut up Kevin

>The devs actually listen to user feedback.
>"we want to be able to have 2 different wallpapers on different monitors!"
>"ok man, we're going to drop support for mint kde XD what's you're next request?"

Ubuntu because at least it's not a frankenstein.

At least unity is gone Thanks

>which one?
Mint
>why?
Comes with cinnamon preinstalled.

>hurr durr n00buntu a shit amirite?
Shit's as close to a no hassle distro as it gets, so if you actually consider a linux based os as your daily driver, those two might be among your best options.

Why is g so full of w10 using gaymen kids...?

There is any reason to avoid canonical and his distros?

op debian is the best debian based distro

topkek >.

>arch
>i3
>still using 2.5TB of RAM
how?

Mint was more stable than Ubuntu from my experiences. Don't have the time to be constantly fiddling with my system either. Just install, get drivers, fuck around with theming a bit, change a few silly default settings (update manager comes to mind immediately), remove unneeded programs and you're good to go.

Mint looks bad. Cinnamon is supposed to be their best desktop for good PCs, but it's still basic and unappealing. Zero reason to used that shit over KDE, which Mint decided to move away from in a stroke of genius.

Mint.
[bait]Distrowatch rankings don't lie.[/bait]

Mint KDE was largely redundant when Kubuntu exists. It makes sense to focus their resources on their most popular editions. Cinnamon and MATE both use GTK, so there's less duplicate work that way.

Nah it's easy to setup and it just werks