I can't decide which linux distro i should use...
Should i take Kubuntu 18.04 or Ubuntu 18.04?

arch linux comments incoming in 3 2 1

Is Arch that good? @heyheni

If you are doing any sort of c++ development you may be more inclined to kubuntu with its kdevelop environment.

Its a very superficial reason though since you get tons of power from Gnome as well (or any *nix for that matter)

@AleCx04 btw I prefer Gnome...sooooo

@RantSomeWhere why should i use arch and not kubuntu/ubuntu 18.04? Any arguments because the UI looks really nice

@nobes its not about the ui. Its about the overall experience ans preference over one distro or another. Arch can damn near look like anything you want, its customization is second only to Gentoo. Some people prefer the way of doing things in Arch, more hands on and bleeding edge means you are always up to date, but it also means things may or may not break. Arch is one of my main distros at home next to debian and ubuntu. Its a matter of preference really.

@AlpineLinnix ubuntu is pretty bloated, works fine on a powerful machine, but definitely bloated.

@RantSomeWhere Does antergos need high system requirements? I want to install it on my second pc which is not that good

an easy, beautiful and beginner friendly linux distro is elementaryOS www.elementary.io

@heyheni i have it as dual boot but everything is fucked up for example the updates aren't working, slow, windows are bugging

I have the best answer

Try antergos!

If u want latest softwares, arch is ur way. If ur fine with ( kinda ) old softwares which are not really updated all that much during the OS life cycle, Ubuntu should be fine for u... or perhaps Linux mint?

I started with Ubuntu a long time ago, but switched to Linux mint. Then went to arch and haven’t looked back since 😍
Plus the AUR has a ridiculous amount of softwares. Virtually every decent software can be found on AUR

@nobes Don't listen to the arch-comments. As @heyheni stated that is more a plague than help.
Sure arch is a good DIY-Distro and I also use it. But for beginners it is just too complicated and will most likely unmotivate you.

----------

To your original question:
The difference between Ubuntu and Kubuntu is that Ubuntu used (nowadays) the gnome desktop and Kubuntu the KDE desktop.

My experience with gnome is, that it has a rather nice and simistic design but can get rather complicated to impossible to make more specialized changes that were not intended by the devs.
I personally use Gnome on my old laptop which is almost solemnly used for school purposes.

KDE on the other hand was a rather controversial desktop in the past since it wasn't an open source project from the beginning (had something to do withe the underlying qt framework).
...

...
KDE 5 (current one) was at first rather buggy (made my own experience with it) but nowadays works like a charm. The desktop looks nice as well and has a lot more customization possibilities within their SystemSettings-Gui.
KDE was always the most resource-demanding desktop but when you have a somewhat decent computer that shouldn't influence your choice. Personally, I started out with KDE 4 (very satisfied) then wen't through hell with the first few years of KDE 5 but now it's all good.

There are also other desktop (as already mentioned) like XFCE (Xubuntu), or Mate (Ubuntu Mate) beeing still very popular.
The main gist of thrmis, that they are very customizeable as well and use comparatively less resources and are recommended for older computers (where the slowness can be really felt).
...

...
Compared to KDE they have better customization in certain fields but most often require extra 3rd-party software (e.g. gedit, compiz, window and theme managers, ...) that can sometimes be tricky to set up properly.

----------

I hope that this rather long reply helped you somewhat. This is based on my own experience since i started out with LinuxMint Cinnamon » LinuxMint Mate with compiz » Kubuntu » Arch with Xfce » Manjaro (Arch based) with KDE + Arch with Gnome.

Just run the Linux Kernel by itself. Trust me it’s better.

@RantSomeWhere as someone who have never used Arch, or any arch-based distro for that matter, I'm interested to know why you state that apt cannot even compare to pacman.

@RantSomeWhere was kind of expecting a comparison of features that pacman have and apt doesn't, features that both have but pacman is superior and why, etc.

- efficiency: How is it more efficient that apt?

- beauty: I don't know how to respond to this

- amount of packages: Not a feature of a package manager

- functionality: Like what?

- power (can update your entire OS with a single command): sudo apt-get update && sudo apt-get dist-upgrade... 1 command more but yeah that can't be the only thing

- can compile packages from source: apt-get --build or use checkinstall. And from what I gather this is done via the makepkg package in Arch, not by pacman itself.

guys what have you done? You managed to group force this 14 year old youngster into installing arch linux. Don't you have any manners?!

now help him with his ssh problems please.
https://devrant.com/rants/1440568/...

@RantSomeWhere just kidding 😄

Haha i love devrant

@RantSomeWhere

"In Ubuntu you have to reinstall your OS to do a version jump. apt update && apt upgrade && apt dist-upgrade is not a full upgrade in that sense"

I don't know how Ubuntu managed to do that but in Debian it is

"Beauty: a subjective thing. I like having a progress bar and the package name and a percentage more than knowing what address the package manager is fetching the package from."

I wouldn't count this as a superior feature but to each his own

"Compile packages. makepkg is a part of pacman. What’s also important is that there’s the AUR, where all the source code packages are. There’s no program you can’t find on the AUR, plus all the repos get snapshotted every day so you can revert your OS to a specific date"

This is part of the overall appeal of Arch I suppose, but it's not specific to pacman. Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to diss Arch. I've actually been meaning to try it but I have not seen yet how the experience will be that much different from Gentoo

@RantSomeWhere I see Arch has support for Armv8 Aarch64 maybe I'll try it on one of my pines or see if I can iPXE boot a live image

@nobes sorry for hijacking your thread man