Does anyone use this? I've yet to find a defining feature list of why anyone should use it aside from cosmetic differences. Does it even have a defining feature set?
this post was submitted on 20 Dec 2023
189 points (97.5% liked)
Linux
48072 readers
1 users here now
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
- No misinformation
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
I mean, you literally described 99,999% of distros tbf.
Sure, but that's what I'm asking about. Why should people try this one?
A better question might be why shouldn't they? I'm not being pedantic (at least not intentionally) but if their defining characteristic is that they're nothing special, just a simple Linux distro that does the basic shit easily enough and looks nice - that has major appeal to people unfamiliar with Linux looking to leave other OS's behind. The vast majority of people that use an OS really have very little idea how it works or why. They just want some basic level of understanding and control over it.
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
I use it. It's great. I've tried Linux many times over the past decade but it never stuck until Zorin. If you're coming from Windows it's a very friendly (and polished) way of being welcomed to Linux while also showing off Linux's strengths, things that are often hidden to the user unless they want to explore the terminal.
For Mac users who are Linux-curious I would recommend Ubuntu because it's much similar, whereas Zorin seems clearly designed with people who liked Windows 10 but not Windows 11.
If you want something like Mac, use elementary os.
I disagree: elementary is quite limited with really basic desktop features out of the box, limited personalization, weird interface decisions with some ugly panels, and pretty behind on updates, relying heavily on their own walled gard-
You know what? You're right.
😂
Kinda. I'm using Elementary OS right now, and I think of it more like a Chromebook... with more options to expand it.
Zorin was, at least a few years ago, tailored to be easy to adapt to for people switching from Windows. This new version looks beautiful, I'm going to take it for a spin!
oh yeah. its an out of the box for folks (like myself) who like that. Lots of apps preinstalled including play on linux. So I can install and start using without adding any additional software. Its not the only oob distro but combining that with the look feel emulation is great and I have never seen an oob that sets up wine so well to use immediately. So its a bit like a combo of a gaming distro with oob and then the lookNfeel thing.
Tbh I see it as "prettier linux mint". Good distro for beginners but nothing more
exactly!
No, but I used this back when I was a little penguin and I had to "see" something working on Linux.
Xrdp server enabled with a toggle instead of messing with the terminal for 1 hour seems unique
That's not exclusive to Zorin however, that's just a Gnome 42 feature (unless the base gnome implementation is the one you're referring to that needs configuring in the terminal).
Ah. The way they wrote that seemed an exclusive...
Nice for gnome, so, when I wanted to set xrdp on debian a couple years ago I cried and almost gave up.
yes and I love it
load more comments
(1 replies)
So let me get this straight, they have a windows look by default, but using GNOME for whatever reason, then they give you the option to switch to something more vanilla GNOME but disable all of the gestures and workspaces, and then they advertise it like they invented gestures when they decide to stop disabling all of them
whats bad with gnome
Nothing, I use gnome, but if you want a windows look by default then plasma is made for that
This looks beautiful, congrats to Zorin contributors!
Not much of a progress this time.
Still waiting for zorin grid.
Is it me or does most of this look like Gnome? 🤔
It is Gnome.
Well I guess that explains it 😅
mfw when entire distros are advertising UI features of gnome that came standard on every DE like 15+ years ago, including gnome.
Seriously, Compiz is from 2006.
Also I find their Zorin OS Pro offer a bit scummy. Now the themes do look nice, but few would spend 50$ for a few themes. So they advertise having 5000$ worth of professional creative alternatives bundled. In screenshots you'll then see Kdenlive, Blender and Inkscape. I don't know what to think about the fact they want 50$ for bundling a few themes and free software. If they had just kept the stupid 5000$ part out I would have been fine with it, professional support can be great for people switching over from windows, but this seems a bit scummy to me.
We need fewer distros and more focus on things that matter.
You're right. I will start a new distro that focuses on the the things that matter.
Man, I laughed so hard at this one
Damn, those silly volunteers are doing the wrong things in their free time!
I think a unified package manager/app store model that is vetted by all contributing distros would go a long way. SteamOS/Steam deck is bringing gamers to linux and that's great. But it would be easier to bring on a lot more desktop users if there was an app store that every distro could visit. Flatpak is close, snaps however I think are too polarizing.
I use fedora silverblue. I'd like to switch to suse microos but the difference is so small that it's probably not worth it to switch. (Just a guesstimate, silverblue has some goodies afterall with the whole image centric os)
Probably, it's almost the same for vanillaos. Because everything is within distrobox and flatpak, I do not work with the native package manager anymore (almost, there are exceptions because of the DE).
If I would switch to microos, I, as an enduser, wouldn't notice too much a real difference.
People should stop making new distros for what should be a post install script. But, things are fucking complicated and that's why we need the forks and new distros.
load more comments
(1 replies)
I disagree. Each distro is a user of a thousand different open source systems. When a distro developer integrates gnome, systemd, bluez, or whatever other system they're finding, reporting, and possibly fixing bugs that end users might miss. Other than arch users, who else is compiling these things from scratch and really digging into the documentation?
Us weird debian testing users.
Gentoo users? Void users?
They’d still be doing that.
That kinda is his point. A distro maintainer patching and distributing a thousand packages is duplicitous. Especially when the only real difference to the user is the DE. Putting those efforts upstream is a better use of resources. I develop software, and I’m not going to test a million different distros especially when the difference between Ubuntu and Zorin is a DE and some additional packages. It makes Linux users very mad, but the reality is that they are too fractured to support every distro they use equally.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Distributions nowadays are defined by their desktop bling :(
It used to be that you could just install whatever desktop you fancied on pretty much any distro.
view more: next ›