zorin os. most out of box functionaility of any distro I know. its a lazy os and im lazy. just want to install and go.

I've moved to Ubuntu after getting burned pretty badly with CentOS's getting mistreated and eventually killed. Ubuntu feels stable enough, both in terms of their updates/quality and in terms of their corporate proceedings (such that I won't get absolutely blasted by mandatory repos being closed down, for example).

Artix with OpenRC, Arch with alternative init systems.

I don't really have a "better distro" preference -- all distros can be tweaked and optimized equally, with no benefits from one another. And yes, even Ub(l)untu.

I prefer Arch (btw) due to the fun of installing it and If it breaks then you that process again with onother de or a different setup

void linux. it uses runit and it's a rolling-release. i like runit because i don't like the systemctl command for some reason. doing ln -s /etc/sv/serv_name /var/service and sv up serv_name is way nicer imo.

Arch is great, but it needs longer explanations considering the user needs to do a lot more. Sometimes you find them, but other times you find a snarky superuser with zero people skills.

It's a shame they aren't government standard, so I could take a local course to become a snarky superuser too.

Most of it involves everyday Linux usages, but some of it is specific to Arch and it breaks so hard. It's not a great thing when you're stupid busy and don't have the headroom to get to the bottom of it. Sometimes all you get is vague theories on how a fix might occur. After that you're playing shell games trying to debug your problems.

Definitely recommend for pro-Linux people that have a breakable laptop that can go on the backburner.

Artix. I went Void -> Arch -> Artix. I can't help but feel that Artix is what Arch should be. Perfect blend between the Arch and Void experience.

been rockin kde neon for the last little while, but also really like mint

Arch, because of the AUR and because I can't get fully used to NixOS. Also, I know my way around Arch better tban any other distro. I tried my luck on Debian and it didn't go that well, but I'm willing to try again soon. (If only I could get Hyprland on Debian....)

Advantages: has all the software I need, new versions as well.

Disadvantages: lacks a stable branch (I recently found myself with limited/no internet access for about 2 months; if Arch had a stable release, I wouldn't have had to rebuild my NixOS system over 100 times while I was trying to get a decent DWM setup.

I was Arch for a long time but now I'm on Fedora. Most of my servers are Ubuntu server, but I'm switching some stuff to fedora server. I've always disliked Ubuntu for some reason.

Arch, because I can never be happy except when I'm bickering with a machine.

Seriously, though, I like the control and the learning factor. I enjoy knowing what my computer is doing and why, AUR is great, and the documentation is generally top-notch. Once you get past the point in the learning curve where everything is on fire and you don't know why (don't forget the 'linux' package when you pacstrap, kids!), it's a delight to use

I started at Sarge, went to Ubuntu Warthog until Eft, and went Suse and Fedora but then changed to Xubuntu Ibex. I stayed until Vervet and since then have found a very comfy home in Arch.

It may be a little behind on updates at this point, but HML is still the best.