How accurate is this image?

how accurate is this image?

Attached: 1494955958386.jpg (1000x1000, 282K)

Other urls found in this thread:

debian.org/doc/manuals/maint-guide/
media.giphy.com/media/47xqMrjTiFPslA0AOK/giphy.gif
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

I started with Ubuntu, moved to Linux Mint distro hopped for a bit then settled on Arch.

no idea what Sup Forums does or posts in desktop threads but myself, started off with fedora a decade ago and tried basically every single distro I could find during the following years until I found the best for my needs, lubuntu

>no idea what Sup Forums does or posts in desktop threads
posting their 1337 riced desktop with screenfetch
>lubuntu
why?there are many other flavors of ubuntu(maybe you actually using a toaster?)

>a toaster
any computer is a toaster nowadays since the moore's baloney's dead, I bet my 2500k will still be better than most of the shit on market in 10 years.

>why?
insanely fast, has the best compatibility with my hardware without the need for tweaking, and lxde looks better than all other

I went from My Boss Recommended It (CentOS; 4/5 but very boring) to Hipster Meme (Mageia; 4/5 would recommend) to More Standard And Normal Distro (Fedora; 3/5 would not recommend) and I will probably try a couple of others in future (Gentoo, Debian, BlackArch).

I'm still a Windowsfag at heart, though.

Went to the gentoo level and went back to windows 10 shit was the comfiest thing ever.

It's more of a cycle. First you start with stable and easy distros like Ubuntu, then get into unstable and hard distros like Arch, then you get tired of that an go back to Ubuntu, then you miss X piece of software that was only in the AUR and go back to arch... and the cycle goes on and on.

>then you miss X piece of software that was only in the AUR
Then you read the Debian Maintainer's Manual, package it properly, become a maintainer

>started with Arch
>sticked with it

I have 3 computers, all of them have Arch Linux as the main OS and one of them has a secondary Windows partition exclusively for gayming.

Whenever I'm bored at work I'm just messing around with some configs/writing additional scripts that are useful for me, it's maximum comfy.

>then you miss X piece of software that was only in the AUR
Has this ever happened to anyone?
There are like 7 packages in the AUR.

I started with Ubuntu, moved on to Mint, then Slackware.
Currently thinking about Debian.

Shit, this is hitting way too close to home..

>how to become a package maintainer
someone should make a oreilly book cover for this
damn,the meme is true

Not very. I ended up with Slackware because I hate complicated bullshit like Fedora or Ubuntu.

>someone should make a oreilly book cover for this
2-3 days of learning and you're ready to submit a package
debian.org/doc/manuals/maint-guide/

I only install Linux on old computers that can't run Windows properly. Mostly an LXDE distro.

so...you should be using the "hard" distro which offers more options when install?

>Knoppix in 2003, back to Win 98 same day
>Ubuntu (Gnome2) in 2008, back to XP same day
>Debian Jessie (nuked Win 8.1) and stuck with Debian.
Had to get Win 7 Ultimate on my msata SSD in X230 for work-related win/mac-cuck statistical software that has zero support for Wine and prohibitively expensive Citrix licenses.This will be completely unnecessary once I get comfy using R/rpy2. Free software and Open Science for the win boys.

Attached: 1508564581647.png (994x559, 326K)

>ubuntu fell to the level of windows 10
what a shame

im only installing loonoox on old pc's because application and driver compatibility is shit and hard to set up when youre a winfag like me.

i went ubuntu > debian > arch > alpine (and working on a goat lfs setup) so the chart almost applies to me

Only if you're retarded enough to believe that.

Hurtful OP. Real hurtful.

wut

one thing i'd like to note about the chart is it's wrong in saying "every distro is the same." distros are set apart by choice of package manager, init, libc, and other hard-to-replace things

>ubuntu
>debian
>arch
>fedora
So true

1 year SuSE
4 years Gentoo
Briefly used Arch
1 year Gentoo
7 years Debian

Ubuntu --> Arch. I like it, it works flawlessly. Nobody gives a shit about your distro of choice and if they do, well then they're nobodies themself.

awesome game someone should try this !!
media.giphy.com/media/47xqMrjTiFPslA0AOK/giphy.gif i did :D

Where is Opensuse?

Partly true but I always end up running Debian. It feels like home and it just works.

Fake and gay.

>ubuntu
>like winshit 10

[Citation needed]

I started with mint, went to manjaro, switched to debian 2 days ago and hated it and I just switched to openSUSE last night. if i decide opensuse isnt for me, ill probably go back to manjaro or another arch-based distro. AUR just made life so easy for me desu.

Started with Mint, then Ubuntu, then Debian, then OpenSuse Tumbleweed, and then Debian sid until today.

I'll suggest two steps missing, either before or after the gentoo/arch stage.

A fair number of people give openSUSE a try. Usually the reasoning is a complete distro with lots of bells & whistles that seems to be "professional" and not need much tweaking. At least, that's the illusion. Similar to mint (a jump to "something different"), it's often a jump-off from ubuntu to "something professional."

Then, having enough linux experience to feel bold, cocky even, most people will hop two or three distros of "something different" again, but also "something more specialized." So you give Kali a spin for edgelord example. Maybe you'll try Solus "just because" out of curiosity (and hope that maybe it works for you),

Final stage I agree Fedora is a top choice, but debian also fills that role. If you've already gone through the debian learning curve, it's merely a different flavor of pain. Can't agree on ubuntu here. I do agree that ubuntu works if you want to "just load linux" to stay away from windows, but it's often a temporary install until you go fedora or debian depending on your tastes.

Also at this point, for people who went openSUSE earlier in the cycle and like it, it's a superior choice to ubuntu for a quick, full featured install. Maybe even stay with it instead of finishing with fedora or debian. It's "good enough" to just get work done.

Attached: 1477841737189.png (1920x1080, 776K)

I myself am on the second to last step of this but don't plan on going back down to ubuntu

Tfw jumped straight from WinXP to Arch 7 years ago
Still there, haven't had a crash in 5 years

WHYY nobody uses slackware nowadays, the ultimate hacking distro forever

+1

Inaccurate.

>ubuntu
>mint to shake things up
>debian because you thought it was barebones
>arch because it is barebones
>settle on manjaro because it's more stable than ubuntu and has pacman+AUR

This is the new image

Attached: 1521952783010.png (500x2000, 352K)

No. I started with xubuntu and now I'm on Arch and it's way more comfy than any other distro I've used, mostly because of AUR.
I'm not going anywhere.

Started with Mint, flop back and forth between Arch and other random distros, used Gentoo for a while, and now I've installed Antergos. With Gnome. And while I ultimately hate Gnome, it is refined and modern looking, so whatever. I don't feel like messing with configs all day anymore.

DELET

Attached: WQi7brf.png (804x906, 46K)

Mageia is pretty nice if you don't mind the small-ish repo and kind of out of date packages
Not really my cup of tea, but its worth a try

Any reason to use Debian (net inst) over Ubuntu (net inst)?

Been using Gentoo for 6 years straight. Never using anything else again.

I work with linux every day. Knowing it well has paid off in a massive way. This image is not accurate for people who actually get good at linux and get paid to use it.

On my personal machines, I use:
- fedora
- debian
- arch
- centos
- alpine

Guess what. I enjoy them all and they all have a place in the ecosystem. None of them are more/less 1337 than the others. They just have different release cylces/package managers/philosophies, which makes them useful for different tasks.

Using Linux is meme/shitty enough even if I'm forced to use it, why do you want me to sink even lower?

About 0%. I've never met anybody who switched to a more tunable distro and went back if they weren't a complete retard.

it's not. all distros are basically just fucking fedora with different base configurations and scripts and package managers.

literally arch is just a bunch of srpm's repackaged for their shittier pacman bullshit.

>ubuntu/fedora FUCKING FEDORA LMFAO at the end
As accurate as anything made by paid Canonical/Redhat shills.

Fedora is one of the best distros if you use linux for a living. Not everyone is a basement dwelling NEET that rices linux and posts screenshots of their anime wallpapers.

>only distro with installer that is easy to use and a disk partitioning tool that isn't completely useless.
>has selinux in enforcing ootb
>free software repo with ONLY free software except for firmware
>is as customizeable as any other distro.

literally not using fedora in 2017 is pretty much dumb. all your bleeding edge me distros are just ripping off fedora's work anyhow.

you too can be some i3/sway using minimalist faggot with fedora as well.

>Complicated shit
>Ubuntu

Pick one

here's my Linux experience :
>started with ubuntu and unity, occasionally using it
>4 years later, start seriously using Linux because I was sick of Windows. Moved to arch and XFCE
>2 years after that, started using Gentoo with herbstluftwm
still using it today, and didn't touch a single Windows install in 3 years.

Yeah, op is pretty much on point.
I started with redhat in 2000, tried many, many, many of the years, use lubuntu now.

thanks shills, but I do UNIX/Linux for a living and using Fedora always felt like someone was throwing grenades at me

It is very accurate. I started using Unix in 1989, I started using Linux in the early 1990s (Slackware distro, originally).

I just want something easy to use, I don't want to futz around with things. My desktop allows KVM, which I sometimes futz with, and multiboot. A few years ago I stuck Debian on the multi-boot, but various hardware did not function, most importantly, wifi. I don't have time to futz around with that, just give me Ubuntu. I've done enough kernel compiles and X11 HSync/VSync tuning, I don't need to do any more.

>I ended up with Slackware because I hate complicated bullshit like Fedora or Ubuntu.
wat

I only made it as far as openSUSE (on par with Fedora/Debian in terms of complexity) before realizing it's doesn't benefit me to go further than Ubuntu. Yeah, other distros might have certain perks - and they don't affect my usage.

It's just adding more work to achieve what Ubuntu and its derivatives do automatically.

Made by a guy who can't install arch or figure out how to install proprietary drivers on debian.

>but I do UNIX/Linux for a living

lmao, good for you faggot. I only do "linux" for a living.

First on Lubuntu, switched to Crunchbang, arch and now Debian

Almost everything is done through flat text files and shell scripts so it's easy to modify/fix if you need.
Also BSD init is nice and in my case is actually faster than systemd.

Yes, it is true.
I use default ubuntu and amazon shopping.

No faggot, I have used from Slackware to Red Hat Enterprise Edition, trying OpenSuse, Arch, Gentoo, OpenSolaris, etc. in between.
I am still using Linux Mint because it has the best Cinnamon implementation and I already know all the bullshit other edgy or 1337 distros forces you to learn.

Close,but it starts and ends with windows.

what does real work mean?

I thought Linux was customization, including anime wallpapers and a screensaver with a panel, and then you write scripts every day to persuade yourself to live

Attached: 1gtyg0cdy1px.png (600x600, 403K)

>Moore's law is dead
>muh single core user bench

>what does real work mean?
For you? Fapping.

>what does real work mean?
reencoding porn with h265 to free up space

Started with Ucuntu, then I switched to Manjaro and fedora (on my two laptops). I use fedora on my work laptop If I ever need to work on Linux and Manjaro is my home Linux desktop whenever I get bored of Windows (yes I dual boot, come at me faggots)

>real work
>win7
>ms office
>wannacry
>meltdown & spectre
>printer HP laserJet
>jira
>redmine

This was forced.

Not very. At best it's accurate to a handful of people, but it probably mostly applies to the guy who made it. Everyone's distro journey is different and everyone has different needs.

but I do use it

Attached: 2018-03-25-105106_1280x800_scrot.png (1280x800, 122K)

slackware is actually a lot simpler than people give it credit for. It's the closest thing to a "set it and forget it" distro out there, and it puts debian's "stability" to shame. But most people seem to think it's practically LFS for some reason.

I moved to it from gentoo because portage nags too much, and slack is pretty much just as flexible, just not quite as automated.

Arch doesn't have to be "1337".

I did settle on it while I was a "learn how linuz really w0rx" newfag, but I've felt no reason to switch to a more "stable" or "productive" distro over the years because Arch is stable and productive if you want it to be.

I don't reconfigure shit, run hipster software or rice anything. I just program, both at home and at work, and arch has all the packages I need to have a productive environment. Pacman is great, and rolling-release is actually much less of a pain to deal with than system upgrates for debian derivatives in my experience.

Very accurate. Started on arch then tried Gentoo. I used nixos for quite a while then finnaly landed on kubuntu

I dob't know how much shit you want to do with Arch that you seriously think i's too difficult.

This.
The wiki just holds your hand through pretty much everything, including troubleshooting.

>debian
>minimal

Decided to get into GNU/Linux, aiming for Arch. Tried Arch and some other distros. Liked Arch best of these, with minimal Debian netinstall coming second. Thanks to AUR, realized I prefer compiling from source. Installed Gentoo and never looked back.

Attached: 1520916730596.jpg (632x950, 132K)

>how accurate is this image?
sheeit I took that exact path lol xD

I don't have any statistical data, only anecdotal evidence. I'm not sure if anybody did any resarch on this subject.

I'm using antergos for the last two years. Everything works out of the box. I tried ubuntu before but unfortunately my mouse haven't worked with it.

Attached: 7B3300E095B045358D9BFBD6BFD3AA48.jpg (383x400, 16K)

>Tried Ubuntu
>Instantly switched to Xubuntu
>Tried Debian
>Shortly switched back to Xubuntu
>Tried Arch
>Shortly switched back to Xubuntu

I never stayed with any of the ones I tried for too long, but I honestly might do a Debian netinstall because I'm starting to fall for the minimalism meme. Arch is fine but honestly I still like Xubuntu more for some reason.

I have never planned or even considered using Gentoo.

This is precisely me. On Manjaro now and have stopped giving it much thought.

>tfw started with arch
It was a bitch to install but at least i didn't had to suffer soybuntu

Attached: 1480095399058.png (279x319, 218K)

I use everything on that picture except gentoo