From beginning of epoch, I've sticked with Debian because it is actually the easiest (opposite to what many people believe) and the most comprehensive distribution (and also cutting-edge if you go with sid). And more recently (like 6 or 7 years ago...), Arch, for some other reasons (structure, philosophy, organization, customization that is like mandatory, but actually made simple for not-so-newbies people, and well thought). Actually, for a newbie I think Fedora is a great option nowadays too (I've never been a huge fan of KDE anyway). I am not old/patient enough to have tried Slackware or Gentoo, I don't think we could modernly recommend it. I tried FreeBSD but, never used it much. I like the general idea and philosophy, I'd love to have more time to dig into it. For most server purpose nowadays, I go with Ubuntu LTS, because, it's is basically Debian, and am tired to argue with sysadmins when they don't understand why do I ask Debian while there is Ubuntu (sysadmins nowadays, not sure they don't actually even know that there is Debian) -___- :D
CentOS, I don't know. I've mixed feelings with this one. First of all, I dont know it too much. Second, I always had problems with it. I think Debian is better (or maybe FreeBSD) for server purpose.
edit I also used to use SuSe. Actually, like 10 years ago, was not so bad, super easy, good hardware support, etc.. But super heavy and slow if you use desktop stuff. I felt this distro rely too much on Java UI things and it doesn't feel super native/natural. I think this is why Ubuntu won the fight (but after on, they came up and enforced the infamous Unity...)
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
Very nice overview.
From beginning of epoch, I've sticked with Debian because it is actually the easiest (opposite to what many people believe) and the most comprehensive distribution (and also cutting-edge if you go with sid). And more recently (like 6 or 7 years ago...), Arch, for some other reasons (structure, philosophy, organization, customization that is like mandatory, but actually made simple for not-so-newbies people, and well thought). Actually, for a newbie I think Fedora is a great option nowadays too (I've never been a huge fan of KDE anyway). I am not old/patient enough to have tried Slackware or Gentoo, I don't think we could modernly recommend it. I tried FreeBSD but, never used it much. I like the general idea and philosophy, I'd love to have more time to dig into it. For most server purpose nowadays, I go with Ubuntu LTS, because, it's is basically Debian, and am tired to argue with sysadmins when they don't understand why do I ask Debian while there is Ubuntu (sysadmins nowadays, not sure they don't actually even know that there is Debian) -___- :D
CentOS, I don't know. I've mixed feelings with this one. First of all, I dont know it too much. Second, I always had problems with it. I think Debian is better (or maybe FreeBSD) for server purpose.
edit I also used to use SuSe. Actually, like 10 years ago, was not so bad, super easy, good hardware support, etc.. But super heavy and slow if you use desktop stuff. I felt this distro rely too much on Java UI things and it doesn't feel super native/natural. I think this is why Ubuntu won the fight (but after on, they came up and enforced the infamous Unity...)