What is the difference between linux distributions and which one to choose?

Question

linux

I'm thinking of slowly switching to linux (until I save up for a poppy)) There are a lot of distributions, but I don't understand what the difference between them is. I tried ubuntu, it seems to be normal, it’s convenient, but the speed of work somehow didn’t really surprise me.
In general, you need a distribution kit, beautiful!, Fast, and convenient. What do you recommend? and yes ... explain the difference between them.

Answer 1

The difference, first of all, is in the policy pursued by the distribution's community, which is expressed from differences in package versions to some architectural differences. In other words, each distribution is focused on its own range of users.
If you want a beautiful distribution first and foremost, it's obviously OpenSuse - the only distribution that knows how to cook KDE out of the box. But this is a bit out of touch with the concept of "fast" on an average machine.
If ease of use is important (just use, not configuration and support), then this is ubuntu. Although, fedora quite, I think, caught up with her in terms of friendliness.
If stability is important, then debian, but you will have to pay for outdated software. But stable.
If a large, growing community is important, ready to help at any time, plus - fresh packages and one of the first to receive updates - Fedora is waiting for you. Moreover, the days when Fedora was actually a test distribution are long gone, now Fedora is a stable and actively developing distribution. Since recently, there are divisions into testing, desktop and server versions. Personally, I prefer Fedora.
Well, I’ll mention Genta, in which, like in no other distribution, you can achieve minimalism and maximum customization of the system to your taste. But the first configuration is always long, plus there are no packages - you have to assemble it yourself. Fortunately, there is a tool that takes control to the maximum - for the user, the difference with binary distributions will be noticeable only in the process time. (a complete rebuild of the system takes several hours).
With regards to the appearance of the working environment - it's all configurable on any distribution. Any DE is available on every distribution, and the choice is solely up to the user.

Answer 2

there is no difference between Linux unix and any other niks systems, including MACOS, they all work the same, bash is the same on all systems. The difference is small in the location of the files and the name of the commands,
for example
apt-get install apache2 -ubuntu
yum install httpd -centos
But it will work in all of them
actually refer to the difference of distributions as banal assemblies of Windows.
but all basic commands will be called the same, in fact, everything else is a banal software assembly.
Keep in mind that graphics in Linux is just a shell like in Windows 3.11
So the difference in it does not affect anything ;)
choose between ubuntu and mint

Answer 3

I recommend linuxmint . The same as ubuntu, but everything superfluous is thrown out, so it works nicer and faster.

Answer 4

If Ubuntu works fine (read - picked up all the equipment) and does not cause disgust, then leave it. Pretty normal distribution. For the end user, different distributions are not much different. The speed of the GUI (compared to the latest versions of Windows) will not surprise you anywhere, provided you have more or less decent hardware. IMHO.

Answer 5

Recently, many people advise manjaro . Based on arch, there are versions with different desktop environments and window managers.

Answer 6

Try elementary os, very fast, on the basis of stable Ubuntu 12.04, almost everything works out of the box, here and there, and everything superfluous is really thrown out in it. Minimalism with a user-friendly face.

Answer 7

This is my creativity.
You install Ubuntu server 14.04. Next, do the following:

tasksel install standard ## можно запустить tasksel и выбрать пробелом все, что нужно, но мне не нравится такой подход - много всякой всячины тянет.

apt-get install xserver-xorg xdg-utils

## далее KDE по желанию. можно и другое установить.

apt-get install kde-wallpapers-default kde-runtime plasma-widgets-workspace kde-workspace kdm konsole plasma-desktop plasma-netbook kde-l10n-ru plasma-desktopthemes-artwork plasma-widget-folderview pm-utils plasma-widget-networkmanagement

apt-get  --no-install-recommends install acpi-support openjdk-7-jre
apt-get install libreoffice-kde libreoffice-l10n-ru libreoffice-help-ru libreoffice-impress libreoffice-calc

apt-get install lintian ## будет установлен со всеми зависимостями и утилитами (честно говоря даже не помню сейчас что это такое)

## веб-сервер для локального тестирования

apt-get install apache2 apache2.2-bin apache2-mpm-prefork apache2-utils
apt-get install php5 php5-cli php5-common php5-dev php5-gd php5-mcrypt php5-mysql php-pear

The list of programs for KDE is extremely minimal. To it should be added at least ark - the shell of the archiver, kmix with the entire sound system, gwenview to view pictures, dolphin - file manager, kate - text editor, browser, salt, pepper to taste.
Still, it doesn't hurt to mark library packages as installed automatically so that there is no such mess:
Something like this. It turns out a good thing. at least significantly better than the default Kubuntu.

Answer 8

Install Ubuntu first, the latest version, now it's 14.10, it's one of the most finished distros you can find, you're the least likely to have any problems.
Over time, you may have questions - answers related to Ubuntu will be easier to find.
The more difficult the questions (if any) are, the more experience you will get, and at some point it will be enough to think about changing the distribution, and there will be experience to figure out whether it is worth doing at all.