Ubuntu or Mint
Mint is just green Ubuntu.
🤌
Could be worse. She calls Debian “Old Ubuntu”.
Mint is better Ubuntu
Actually Mint is un-enshittified Ubuntu
IMO Pop_OS matches the definition better.
Not the Debian edition
My favorite edition!
better Ubuntu
And its a good pick too! Tho my favorite is pop!_OS
I liked the feel of Pop_OS!, the setup and configuration are great, but damned it was unappealing looks wise for me.
I mean, you can just install another DE on it if the looks is the problem. There’s also System76’s new COSMIC DE coming out somewhere in summer. It should be blazingly responsive as it’s written in Rust and has a GNOME-like UI.
Yeah I feel like that just defeats the purpose of it though, in that case just install Debian.
Yeah I am interested in Cosmic DE.
Mint is old.
This issue is going to be fixed with the edge ISO and Mint is way more similar to Windows in terms of UI that helps a lot of beginners to transition smoothly
I guess GNU/Linux, musl+busybox/Linux in not really popular
I don’t think that either of them count as ‘Linux distributions’. And sadly, it matters. Even the bugs are not consistent across distros.
Probably depends how you define things. Like, is Xubuntu Xubuntu or Ubuntu with Xfce included by default? How much change is necessary before it’s not “debian with added bits”?
Probably based on how the OS defined itself. Steam is able to gather information like this easily.
I think a lot of people just got trolled in this thread.
snufkin linux
Chrome OS.
Ubuntu for sure, about every companies I worked at were using Ubuntu as main dev. And now in the new company I work for, it’s WSL2 in Windows, using Ubuntu too.
Only non-Ubuntu I used in companies was CentOS.
So pretty sure Ubuntu is the most popular/used.
It’s the only version I’ve come across as a pre-installed option for bought systems, particularly from Dell. A big thing going for it is if you search ‘how to do X in Linux’ you can pretty safely bet some or even most top hits are Ubuntu related.
Ubuntu 100%, if you count how many distros are ubuntu based (and collaterally debian based), but I believe it is the most used one even if you only count official ubuntu releases
Maybe arch would be quite high, if you count the steamdeck as desktop (maybe), and the big increase on arch users in the past couple of years (wen’t from being rare to 1 in 3 users saying “I use arch btw”)
In professional work space, ubuntu will probably be highest. Second place I would guess Fedora
As personal workstation I would guess arch (even without steam deck) followed by mint or some flavour of Ubuntu
I don’t think Arch is more used than Ubuntu, unless maybe if you count all the Ubuntu flavors separately
Hannah Montana Linux is probably the most popular Linux distro.
In all seriousness, popularity isn’t necessarily the best metric for what you should run on your computer. Ubuntu might be fairly popular, but it also isn’t particularly good.
PC deez nuts
There is not a reliable way to determine that, by design.
If we are talking about desktop PCs, maybe Ubuntu, but based these reports it’s Arch.
That’s because SteamOS, the operating system preinstalled on the Steam Deck, is based on Arch.
I don’t understand why they haven’t offered a way to filter out the Deck from those results. It skews every category (CPU, GPU etc.)
Not really…That’s not a linux user metric it’s a steam user metric. Seems fine to include the steam hardware platform
Worth keeping in mind that the steam deck uses a distro based on arch, so it might be inflating the arch numbers in that steam survey.
I don’t think it is. Mint is based on Ubuntu but still shows up as mint. Arch is very popular
deleted by creator
Nah in that category it was separating steamOS. Here is the stats for operating system for Linux.
deleted by creator
Yeah you can filter stats by OS then click on the linux os section to get more details then you’ll see what I screenshot. I had to dig to find it.
With Steam having a gaming audience I’d argue that this has at least a slight bias towards Arch, as the latest kernel versions and other software are often advantageous for gaming in particular.
But even with the Steam numbers note that Arch is just listed as one single variant, while Ubuntu has separate entries for different versions. Ubuntu LTS 22.04 alone is so close to Arch that it’s probably ahead once you include all versions.
Thst depends in a lot of things.
What do you mean with “PC”? Is a smartphone a PC? Is a steamdeck a PC? The Laptop of a government employee? A Raspberry Pi? What about a TV-box or an e-reader?
Because if you mean in general on non-server hardware it’s probably some weird Chinese/indian fork for their government PCs.
Otherwise it could be Arch due to the steam decks, but then again it depends on how tightly you define “distribution”. As others have mentioned, is Xubuntu their own distribution or does it count as Ubuntu? What is Mint/Pop!_OS?
But no matter what, it’s not MX Linux.
A smartphone is not a PC I’d wager. People can treat them like ones but then we’d have to be annoying and broaden it beyond what anyone could possibly mean.
Most people mean a non-apple laptop or desktop when they say a PC. It’s widely enough accepted that it shouldn’t be too ambiguous when used.
PC is a computer based on IBM PC compatible standard, so usually x86 processor architecture with compatible with it components.
The term is so common that in practical language people started to use it as a replacement of the “desktop PC” or overall anything that is not pocketable or Apple.
But I guess with such question from OP it does not matter, as computers at the edge of the definition (like x86 Android tablets) are in a fraction of percent and won’t matter in “what’s the most popular”.
I would say we’re beyond the era of PC referencing the classic “x86 IBM Personal Computer compatible” definition. PC could reasonably be considered to include many ARM systems, considering there are now Windows laptops shipping with ARM processors that can run “PC” software. Besides, most new x86 PCs aren’t IBM PC compatible anyways as legacy BIOS support has been dropped by a lot of UEFI implementations. I would consider any device that runs a desktop style OS (be it Windows, Linux, or even MacOS) a PC. The distinction in my mind is specifically mobile vs. desktop. Android and iOS are not PC. They’re primarily touch driven and apps are restricted to a certain format with a centralized app store where you are expected to get all of your apps. Windows/Linux/MacOS are primarily keyboard and mouse driven and you have a lot more flexibility on acquiring new apps, with their forms of “sideloading” and “rooting/jailbreaking” being things that are just normal and accepted rather than workarounds/hacks to break out of the walled garden. I would also go as far as saying a smartphone can be a PC if you have a PC like OS on it, such as mobile Linux OSes that let you run desktop applications.
The girl reading this comment
https://survey.stackoverflow.co/2023/?ref=itsfoss.com#section-most-popular-technologies-operating-system says for developers: Ubuntu, then WSL, then Debian, then everything else, then Arch, then…
Android also has personal use that ranks higher than WSL but professional use that ranks a tiny bit higher than Debian. Not sure if it’s a Linux distro, but it’s tangential.
Android, ChromeOS, Coreboot, WSL2 are all Linux Distros
IDK about Coreboot, but Android has a completely different userland. The only thing it has in common with Linux is the kernel. Nearly everything else is different. Everything else I agree, but only if you mean WSL2, which is basically an enhanced virtual machine, instead of WSL1, which translates system calls to Windows.
IDK about Coreboot, but Android has a completely different userland. The only thing it has in common with Linux is the kernel.
Completely different ? How so ? Last time I did an
adb shellI could uselsandfindafair.There are two components that define a Linux distribution. The first is the kernel. The other is the core user land that includes the coreutils and libc. This part is made of GNU coreutils and glibc or compatible alternatives like busybox and musl. Every Linux distro has this. The other user land software stack are also similar across distributions, like X/Wayland, QT/GTK, dbus, XDG, etc.
In Android, everything in the user land is different. It doesn’t have the same coreutils or libc unless you install it. ls and find are so common across *nixes that Android coreutils may be reimplementing it. Then you have APKs, surfaceflinger, etc that are not part of regular Linux distros.
An easy test for this is to see if a Linux program compiled for your platform runs on your OS. Linux programs easily run on alternative distros. But Linux programs won’t run on Android or vice-versa, unless you install a compatibility layer.
Maybe I exaggerated, but what I meant is that Android lacks many ubiquitous components of Linux distros. For more information you can read https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2009/02/an-introduction-to-google-android-for-developers/.
Android is Linux+Stuff so it is a linux Distro XD
Not in my book.
(source: me book)
The differences said in the link above cause a drastically different developer & user experience.
define “most popular” please
for instance https://distrowatch.com/dwres.php?resource=popularity, does that metric fit your definition?
Anyway whatever the answer it doesn’t really matters, at the end of the day it is always Linux anyway, regardless of package manager, desktop environment or init.
I’d just warn you against Ubuntu, because its company Canonical is behaving a lot like a young Microsoft these days.
