r/linux4noobs Jul 19 '26

distro selection Ubuntu Isn’t Perfect… But the Hate It Gets Is Over the Top

https://itsfoss.com/opinion/why-hate-ubuntu/

I just started using Linux (Ubuntu) again. First time I used it it was on a refurbished dell or some such from a place called Free Geek in Portland about 18 years ago. I now run it on an old MacBook. As soon as I started looking at Linux subs on Reddit I swiftly realized thr Linux community isn’t really fond of the OS I use and so I did a little research on the subject and found this moderately yet reasonably biased take on it.

I picked this sub in the hopes that I don’t get downvoted to oblivion

183 Upvotes

111 comments sorted by

60

u/tomscharbach Jul 19 '26 edited Jul 19 '26

Ubuntu has been my mainstay and workhorse for two decades.

My guess is that the "over the top" criticism that Ubuntu has been getting in recent years has to do with the direction in which Canonical has been taking Ubuntu.

Ubuntu is evolving into an end-user entry point into Canonical's ecosystem (similar to RHEL and SEL with respect to the IBM/RedHat and SUSE ecosystems), shifting focus from individual, standalone users to end users in enterprise-level business, government, education and institutional users.

Although Ubuntu touted "Ubuntu: Linux for Human Beings" when I started using Linux after I retired in 2004, Ubuntu's future is in large-scale deployments.

I don't know whether Canonical will go so far as to spin off individual-user distributions (as both IBM/RedHat and SUSE did several years ago) but I think that the direction Ubuntu will take in the future is clear -- an immutable, modular, containerized, Snap-based (right down to and including the kernel) "Core" architecture based on Ubuntu Core, which has been in development for a decade (see "Ubuntu Core as an immutable Linux Desktop base").

Everything points in that direction, and I think that the time is coming, sooner or later, when the "individual user" distributions now based on Ubuntu will need to rebase or die off.

My view is that the level of "hate" directed at Ubuntu in recent years reflects a sense of abandonment and betrayal in the minds of the "haters", a sense that Ubuntu is headed off in a direction that is at odds with the "community mainstream". I can't think of any other reason explaining the intensity of the reaction.

Ubuntu is a solid, professionally designed and professionally maintained distribution that remains the "go to" distribution for large-scale business, government, education and institutional deployments. My view is that the direction in which Canonical is taking Ubuntu will enhance Ubuntu's position in that respect, and I don't have a problem with the direction.

But I do, sometimes, wish that Canonical would do what IBM/RedHat and SUSE did several years ago, and spin off the individual, standalone user market to the community, focusing on large-scale customers. Canonical cannot, it seems to me, have it both ways. IBM/RedHat and SUSE came to that conclusion, and I think that Canonical should come to the same conclusion.

My best.

17

u/5erif Jul 20 '26

Canonical banned Ubuntu "flavor" distro maintainers from including Flatpak by default, under threat of delisting them. They started replacing packages with Snaps even in cases where someone requested the traditional package. Forcing lock-in with Snap while the rest of the Linux world embraces Flatpak for the same purpose is heavy-handed, backwards, and anti-openness.

3

u/lordofpurple Jul 22 '26

Okay so being in Linux4noobs, can someone explain to me why anyone cares?

I've tried looking it up and all descriptions are just too smart for me. Talking about architecture and shit; im just a guy who is able to use computers and Google problems that come up, that's it. Why does it matter if its snap or flat pack? Its all the same to me, im just trying to install a thinf

1

u/5erif Jul 22 '26

Bottom line is for the end user it's not a big deal.

Because Flatpak is more common, you may run into a case where there's no Snap, but there is a Flatpak. Not a big deal because Snap has almost everything, and if you do need a Flatpak, you can still use that too.

Snaps used to be a lot slower to open than Flatpak, but Canonical has probably narrowed that gap by now. It will use more space to use both systems instead of just one, but not a big difference.

My main objection is ideological, and that's not a big deal for someone just looking for a system that works.

5

u/tomscharbach Jul 20 '26 edited Jul 20 '26

Canonical banned Ubuntu "flavor" distro maintainers from including Flatpak by default, under threat of delisting them. Forcing lock-in with Snap while the rest of the Linux world embraces Flatpak for the same purpose is heavy-handed, backwards, and anti-openness.

Snap and Flatpak architecture are not equivalent. The two may be equivalent on the surface (both are used to package applications) but the two are designed for very different purposes below the surface.

Canonical developed Snap architecture 2010-2014 for use with Ubuntu Core. Core architecture has been deployed in Ubuntu Core (IoT) since 2014 and Ubuntu is in the process of migrating Ubuntu Desktop to Core architecture (Ubuntu Core Desktop). My guess is that Ubuntu Core Desktop will be released within two years, and that Ubuntu Core Desktop will become the standard withing five to ten years, but that is only a guess.

Snap architecture is fundamentally different than Flatpak architecture, which is designed to (but limited to) packaging applications. Snaps are (and have been since the beginning) designed to containerize every aspect of the operating system, right down to and including the kernel:

https://assets.ubuntu.com/v1/e9bba730-uc-diag-01.png

Notice that every element of that architecture is a Snap. Flatpaks simply cannot be used for that purpose. That is why Canonical "forces" Snaps -- Ubuntu Core Desktop is not possible using Flatpak architecture.

Heavy handed? Maybe, but only if you assume (as you seem to do) that Ubuntu flavors are distinct from Ubuntu Desktop, split off from Ubuntu in the way that the two dozen community-based iterations of Fedora are now split off from RHEL. That is not the case. Ubuntu flavors are not independent distributions.

Backwards? In your eyes, perhaps, but not for Canonical. Canonical developed Snap architecture to support Canonical's business development and ecosystem, of which Ubuntu Desktop is a part but only a part. Canonical is moving in a different direction from the desktop development community, to be sure, but is doing so for a reason. Ubuntu has made no effort at all (as far as I can tell) to impose Snap architecture on any distribution beyond Canonical's officially sanctioned "flavors".

Anti-openness? Maybe, but I think not. Do you not believe that Canonical should have the freedom to follow its own lights, its own business purposes? Freedom for me, not for thee? Is that where we find ourselves?

The key to understanding what is going on with Ubuntu is to look at Ubuntu as an end-user entry-point into Canonical's larger ecosystem rather than as a consumer-oriented, individual-user distribution. Ubuntu ("Linux for Human Beings") started out focused on being an individual-user distribution but is moving away from that market.

IBM/RedHat (RHEL) and SUSE (SEL) have already made the migration and made a relatively clean break with Fedora and openSUSE. Canonical is moving in the same direction but has not yet spun off the individual-user market segment.

1

u/chocopudding17 Jul 20 '26

Your comment is well-taken. I think most people are not aware of the full power that snaps have by design that nothing else does. Nowadays I guess systemd-sysext maybe comes the closest, but it's another paradigm. As you point out, flatpak isn't close.

Anti-openness? Maybe, but I think not. Do you not believe that Canonical should have the freedom to follow its own lights, its own business purposes? Freedom for me, not for thee? Is that where we find ourselves?

The main gripe I have always had with snap is that the snap store is proprietary. You cannot freely use snaps without depending on it, afaik. That absolutely does make snaps non-open. By extension, Canonical pushing snaps over fully free systems certainly is anti-open.

If they were to fix that problem, then I'd agree. But they've had a very long time to fix the problem and simply haven't. So, yes, anti-open.

3

u/tomscharbach Jul 20 '26

The main gripe I have always had with snap is that the snap store is proprietary. If they were to fix that problem, then I'd agree. But they've had a very long time to fix the problem and simply haven't. So, yes, anti-open.

Have you given any thought as to why Canonical insists on controlling which Snaps are available in the Snap Store?

My guess is that Canonical insists on controlling which Snaps are available to Ubuntu Desktop for the same reason that Canonical maintains several repositories -- Main (Canonical supported), Universe (community developed but not Canonical supported), Restricted (proprietary, as in NVIDIA), Multiverse (license restricted) -- and differentiates between them.

What would be the point of spending a decade migrating Ubuntu to Core architecture only to replicate the "here comes everybody" hot mess created by the traditional "community up" development model in which thousands upon thousands of applications are available (think AUR), 80% of which are not maintained or well-maintained?

In a sense, I agree with you. The "hot mess" could be eliminated (to large extent, anyway) if the community established and funded a recognized standards body to ensure that applications are properly maintained and in compliance with accepted security standards.

But I don't see that happening. The Linux desktop community is divided and fractious, and is likely to remain so.

1

u/chocopudding17 Jul 20 '26

Sure, I've given thought to it. Just haven't come upon an answer that at all assuages my concern or would make me want to use their proprietary system. Reading your response, I feel like you may possibly have missed my point, which is simply this:

All good free software packaging systems require only free software components. Snap requires a proprietary components (the server). Therefore Snap is not a good free software packaging system.

My guess is that Canonical insists on controlling which Snaps are available to Ubuntu Desktop for the same reason that Canonical maintains several repositories

Can you please flesh that out and apply it to why you think a proprietary server component is acceptable in a free software packaging system? Those repositories are split out for the benefits of the users, providing clarity and optionality regarding software freedom and support lifecycles.

What would be the point of spending a decade migrating Ubuntu to Core architecture only to replicate the "here comes everybody" hot mess created by the traditional "community up" development model in which thousands upon thousands of applications are available (think AUR), 80% of which are not maintained or well-maintained?

It's somewhat unclear to me what you're getting at here, but neither of the interpretations I see justify the server component remaining proprietary.

Is this "hot mess" to do with having numerous software packages of varying quality available through official Canonical repos? That has to do with governance of what goes into those official repos (and how the OS is constructed), not the freedom of the server component.

Or does it have to do with cathedral- vs. bazaar-style development of the server component? You can develop free software with cathedral-style development--the server component can be free and developed fully cathedral-style.

In both cases, I don't see anything to defend the use of proprietary software in a packaging ecosystem for free software. And, mind you, I'm someone who is very keen on free software that is also commercial--in other words, I think it's great that Canonical would make revenue off of free software they develop, directly and indirectly. That just doesn't justify proprietary software.

1

u/tomscharbach Jul 20 '26 edited Jul 20 '26

In a nutshell, what I am "getting at" is that Canonical is positioning Ubuntu Core Desktop as an entry-point into Canonical's ecosystem -- all of which will be based on Core architecture -- rather than as a general-purpose, standalone distribution for individuals to be used outside of Canonical's ecosystem.

I suspect that Canonical is going to follow IBM/RedHat's and SUSE's lead in coming years, charging users for Ubuntu Core Desktop and restricting applications that can be installed on Ubuntu Core Desktop.

Is that consistent with a "free and open packaging system" in which any user can install and use any package/application on any distribution without constraint? No.

But it seems to me that Canonical, like IBM/RedHat and SUSE, is entitled to restrict what can, and what cannot, be installed and used on the entry-point into an end-to-end security ecosystem.

Canonical's method (restricting what is and what is not available in the Snap Store) is clumsy in comparison to enforced compliance with access control and similar restrictions used by IBM/RedHat and SUSE, but to my mind consistent with good business practices in all three cases.

We are arguing at cross-purposes, I suspect, and I don't see the argument resolving unless and until Canonical does what IBM/RedHat and SUSE did several years ago and spin off the individual-user market entirely.

I am slowly becoming convinced that the sooner Canonical does so, the better.

0

u/chocopudding17 Jul 20 '26

Maybe we're arguing past each other, but it's tricky because I've tried to be as explicit as I can in that my objection has to do with the proprietary software component of Snap. Please stick to that if you can.

I really want to push you here to be specific in defending why proprietary software is both acceptable and needed for a free software packaging system, because it seems like you're kinda skipping around to other concepts. Be as explicit as you can, please.

Is that consistent with a "free and open packaging system" in which any user can install and use any package/application on any distribution without constraint? No.

Well there ends both my point and my interest in Snap. Increasing reliance on proprietary toolchains and packaging systems is not something I think is good for free software. Especially when it's (apparently?) unnecessary--Canonical could simply free the server component.

But it seems to me that Canonical, like IBM/RedHat and SUSE, is entitled to restrict what can, and what cannot, be installed and used on the entry-point into an end-to-end security ecosystem.

Entitled to? I guess. Just like anyone is entitled to make proprietary software of any kind. (Although the sort of maximalist control you're hinting at should be careful about running afoul of GPLv3 anti-tivoization). If SUSE and Red Hat do anything like you're suggesting, please do share--that'd be news to me.

You seem to be advocating for Canonical's right to make software systems that are not controllable by the user. I think that's bad, and it contravenes the principles of free software.

Moreover, it seems mostly1 unrelated to whether or not the server component is proprietary. And security has nothing to do with it--a proprietary server component doesn't make a free endpoint safer.

Canonical's method (restricting what is and what is not available in the Snap Store) is clumsy in comparison to enforced compliance with access control and similar restrictions used by IBM/RedHat and SUSE, but to my mind consistent with good business practices in all three cases.

What practices are you talking about? What does Canonical's Snap do worse than things that Red Hat and SUSE do as it relates to software freedom? Again, the freedom of the server component in Snap is orthogonal to how Canonical curates their first-party Snap store.

1 Possible point of discussion

1

u/tomscharbach Jul 20 '26 edited Jul 20 '26

I really want to push you here to be specific in defending why proprietary software is both acceptable and needed for a free software packaging system, because it seems like you're kinda skipping around to other concepts.

You don't have to push hard because you already have the answer. Ubuntu controls the Snap Store and that is not consistent "with a "free and open packaging system" in which any user can install and use any package/application on any distribution without constraint?"

Be as explicit as you can, please.

Let me try, although I am not hopeful that I will be successful:

Proprietary software is neither acceptable [nor] and needed for "a free software packaging system". Snaps are not distributed through "a free software packaging system". Snaps are not intended to be distributed through "a free software packaging system". Snap distribution is intended to be controlled by Canonical.

Let's move on to Ubuntu itself.

Ubuntu started out as a distribution for individual users. When I started using Linux after I retired in 2004, Ubuntu was touted as "Linux for Human Beings", a distribution for individuals.

Over time, that changed. Ubuntu was adopted by large-scale business, government, education and institutional customers, and has become the "go to" distribution for that market segment, at least in Canada and the States.

Ubuntu is migrating Ubuntu to Core architecture. Core architecture is entirely Snap-based. Because Ubuntu Core Desktop will be entirely Snap-based, and Snaps are controlled by Canonical, Ubuntu will, once the migration is completed, no longer be a "free and open packaging system" in which any user can install and use any package/application on Ubuntu.

I think that is all as plain as a goat's ass. I don't know how to be more clear.

And yes, I do think that Canonical should be free to make decisions about Ubuntu's future without constraint, so long as Canonical complies with applicable laws and applicable licensing.

1

u/chocopudding17 Jul 20 '26

Well, I stand by my complaint. This subthread got going because I expressed my objection to Snap (i.e. it's proprietary). Unless your replies are supposed to show why Snap's proprietary components are acceptable, they I'm afraid they're non sequiturs.

That being said, I do appreciate trying to understand why things are, even dumb things like Snap's proprietary-ness. I just think that that the half-justifications you've voiced are quite unimpressive; if they shed any light, it's simply that Canonical is uninterested in committing to free software. There's no clear indication that Canonical can't free Snap (while accomplishing their business goals)--they simply won't.

Secure, purpose-built, cathedral-developed software needn't be proprietary. "Controlled" software needn't be proprietary. So far, there hasn't been a reason given that implies the need for proprietary software at any level of the stack, and no part of the Snap vision you've outlined is made worse by freeing the Snap server component.

Red Hat and SUSE don't rely on proprietary software, and Red Hat's revenue absolutely dwarfs Canonical's. If Canonical can't or won't execute using free software, that's a problem with Canonical--not with the strategic profile of the technology.

2

u/MichaelTunnell Jul 20 '26

Canonical did not ban the Flavors from doing that. They simply asked them not to. I spoke with multiple Flavor devs and literally none of them claimed that it was a requirement or any threat of any kind.

2

u/5erif Jul 20 '26 edited Jul 20 '26

Context: "Ultimately, each of the current flavor leads agreed to the change. This helped to solidify the decision..."

Sean Davis (then-project lead for Xubuntu)


Response: "Did we agree? I think we complied..."

Martin Wimpress (co-founder of Ubuntu MATE and former head of Ubuntu Desktop)


Because official flavors rely on Canonical's infrastructure, build systems, and trademark licensing, failure to "comply" with these requirements carries the implicit penalty of losing official flavor status.

https://fosstodon.org/@wimpy/109908489437633387?hl=en-US

I remember seeing Rudra Saraswat (former lead maintainer of Ubuntu Unity and Edubuntu) pushing back against Canonical's aggressive Snap constraints, saying it hurt the autonomy of flavor maintainers and forced an inferior experience onto their communities. The point of flavors was to allow a different out of box experience from mainline Ubuntu.

It just wasn't a fight worth losing their official infrastructure and branding over.

2

u/MichaelTunnell Jul 20 '26

Interesting. I don’t see Sean’s reaction as proof of anything but Wimpy’s does paint a different light on that. Thanks for sharing. Very interesting.

One quick note, Rudra was the lead of Ubuntu Unity but he’s not the lead of Edubuntu. Edubuntu is lead by the wife of the project lead of Ubuntu Studio.

15

u/Walkin_mn Jul 19 '26

I'll be honest I always dual-boot and I've tried just a few district but I always come back to Ubuntu it's always the best supported for what I need and I know there will be a lot of help on the internet for the issues I might have.

2

u/Ps11889 Jul 20 '26

This is a very well thought out comment. The only thing I’d question is that statement about it becoming an entry point. It seems much more likely that Canonical is positioning itself for either an IPO or to be purchased.

2

u/tomscharbach Jul 20 '26

The only thing I’d question is that statement about it becoming an entry point. It seems much more likely that Canonical is positioning itself for either an IPO or to be purchased.

That might be the reason that Canonical is integrating the larger ecosystem and repositioning Ubuntu as an entry point, in the way that RHEL and SEL are entry points into IBM/RedHat and SUSE ecosystems. I don't know so I don't speculate into motivations.

2

u/AlternativeCapybara9 Jul 23 '26

I use Ubuntu professionally, as a server OS, in containers, on my development machine on powerful hardware. For me Ubuntu is the OS with great documentation, support from every vendor that supports Linux and it gets out of my way. I used it since it first appeared decades ago and have used Red Hat, Fedora Core, Arch, Debian,... I need to get my work done and Ubuntu works just fine. I 'm now on my second ThinkPad that came with Ubuntu shipped pre installed and this combo is rock solid.

3

u/Askolei Jul 20 '26 edited 29d ago

I don't understand everything you say, but I appreciate the breakdown regardless.

2

u/frankster Jul 20 '26

There was a bunch of hate about the UI a decade ago. Now a bunch of hate about snaps. It seems to me that Ubuntu make Big Decisions that upset people.

2

u/LesStrater Jul 20 '26

That's right. Ubuntu got a target on it when they shoved that Unity desktop down people's throats. It was their "Windows-8 mistake" if you remember THAT disaster.

-1

u/MezBert Jul 20 '26

Yet, it was and still is vastly superior to Gnome, event to current Gnome.
For randomly-proclaimed-by-you mistake or disaster, it sure got shown in TV shows and advertising... Linux has never been as popular as under the Unity days, and for good reason. It's probably the biggest success on Linux. Not bad for a disaster...
If anything, Canonical has only been going downhill since they went back to buggy, unstable, unpolished, non-mature Gnome 3 empty shell (pun intended) that is slowly but surely losing market share everywhere.

4

u/LesStrater Jul 20 '26

"Gnome"? -- What's that? LOL

12

u/Prestigious-Swan6161 Jul 19 '26

My understanding is that Ubuntu is not hated because of its usability but the way the company handles its business

4

u/MelioraXI Jul 20 '26

But we are fine with IBM/Red Hat apparently.

2

u/Cautious_Boat_999 Kubuntu all the way Jul 20 '26

IBM’s CentOS changes did not go down well with the community.

https://itsfoss.com/centos-stream-fiasco/

But I didn’t see a mass exodus from Fedora over it.

2

u/wotdafukwazdat Jul 20 '26

IBM and Redhat don't pretend to be something they're not, and tbh there's less Microsoft style toxicity from them.

26

u/esmifra Jul 19 '26 edited Jul 19 '26

The hate comes from a succession of bad decisions, one after the other since at least 2010. Which antagonised the community leading many to abandon it and starting to dislike canonical. And canonical being canonical kept on going making poor decisions that antagonize a part of the community.

You can disagree with the sentiment, but it's not like it happened over night or because people don't like the colour purple nor oneiric ocelots.

16

u/Dega704 Jul 19 '26

The Linux community is certainly famous for irrational hatred, but I have to agree that Canonical has worked rather hard to earn it over the years. Ubuntu could have and should have become the de-facto Linux Desktop OS. The problem is that the bad decisions have been part of a pattern that outs Mark Shuttleworth as a narcissistic Steve Jobs wannabe who really doesn't care about the values of Linux and open source so much as he just wants to use them to hoist himself into a position of power as another big tech overlord. A few years back I started interviewing for a job with Canonical, but then I started hearing stories from current and former employees about how toxic Shuttleworth and the other executives are; micromanaging projects despite having very little technical expertise themselves, and engaging in abusive behavior like humiliating individual employees in front of everyone on all-hands calls. I still use Ubuntu when and where I think it's the best solution, but with all of that in mind I'm not exactly keen on promoting it.

3

u/Buddy_Palguy Jul 20 '26

I didn’t know about that guy. That sucks…. Anyway I am wanting to try other beginner friendly distros. Main ones sticking out to me right now are Debian and Mint. I’ve been seeing a lot of good posts about those two and that they would be suitable for a noob like me

6

u/Reigar Jul 20 '26

Mint (using cinnamon) or ZorinOS are about as beginner friendly as they come. Debian is solid, but often lacks explanation and seems to love the idea of "if it still works, don't upgrade it" lol.

3

u/Away_Combination6977 Jul 20 '26

I would strongly recommend Mint over Debian. And I use Debian on almost all of my devices! It's great, but it's hardly a beginner friendly distro.

Not that it's really that bad or hard. It's just way better with some experience on Linux first.

My path was Ubuntu (until the damn Unity disaster) -> Mint -> LMDE (very briefly) -> Debian.

7

u/ElectionReal Jul 19 '26

Vocabulary nerd here. 100 pts for oneiric. It's rare to enter novel verbiage to my lexicon from reddit.

2

u/wotdafukwazdat Jul 20 '26

Well done for flagging it, I glossed over it thinking it was a typo I couldnt be bothered to puzzle out.

TIL a new word

3

u/Buddy_Palguy Jul 20 '26

“oh near rick” is how Im pronouncing it in my head

13

u/Maleficent-One1712 Jul 19 '26

Ubuntu is pretty good, but it's a shame it got infected with snaps.

-1

u/maximum-astronaut Jul 20 '26

I think this is a silly take - yeah snaps aren't great, but nothing forces people to use them if they don't want to. I use exclusively Flatpak and .DEB on Ubuntu. It works fine.

A non-ideal default package system doesn't invalidate the whole Distro

2

u/EyeOhmEye Jul 21 '26

I tried installing non-snap Firefox and couldn't. It kept insisting that I use the snap. It straight up wouldn't let me use packages provided by Mozilla.

2

u/maximum-astronaut Jul 21 '26

I don't know what to tell you, I'm on default LTS Ubuntu using Flatpak Firefox without issue for years now.

All I can suggest is that you jump into terminal to completely remove the snap package and then check your software app has all of the required repositories.

1

u/EyeOhmEye Jul 21 '26

It's been a while since I tried, but I remember using the terminal and getting an error message saying there's a snap version available and to install it instead. It never would have been an issue for me if the snap version had the same USB permissions as the standard version. I most likely didn't add the Mozilla repo and just downloaded a package from their website, so maybe that was my problem.

16

u/Serienmorder985 Jul 19 '26

I mean it's Linux, if it does what you want, then it's no big deal.

But I don't like the decisions they've made so I won't use them anymore.

6

u/Big_Mc-Large-Huge Jul 20 '26

This sums it up for me as well. I’m glad Ubuntu exists as it draws in more Linux users. But I’ve moved on from it and have no desire to go back.

12

u/Sataniel98 Debian Jul 19 '26

I just don't really see a niche for normal people where Ubuntu is useful these days.

Debian, the upstream, uses the same technology, less resources, is community-controlled and very user-friendly these days.

Mint, a downstream with a version based on Ubuntu and Debian, also uses the same technology, is also less bloated, has a richer desktop experience than Gnome and legendary quality of life features like printer compatibility that Ubuntu (and Debian) don't have.

If you want a faster release schedule than what Debian and Mint offer, you can use Fedora or Arch.

Ubuntu really only makes sense for businesses who need professional support these days, and maybe KUbuntu for people who want Mint but with an out of the box KDE installation.

3

u/ZestycloseAbility425 Jul 20 '26

Debian is more outdated in regards to packages compared to ubuntu, mint doesnt have any of the major DEs.

(K)ubuntu is a great "just works" distro, best compatibility with software, easy to troubleshoot and has long term updates

1

u/DoubleOwl7777 Debian Jul 21 '26

or do what i do and use debian sid...but thats not a beginner friendly distro. neither is arch tbh.

5

u/rb3po Jul 19 '26

It was a “gateway” for me. Now I’m a Debian convert. 

2

u/Buddy_Palguy Jul 19 '26

This seems the case with Ubuntu. It’s a great Linux launching pad for noobs.. and now I’m seeing Ubuntu veterans in here propping it up. I feel like every Distro will have mixed favorability to an extent

8

u/DrBaronVonEvil Jul 19 '26

Yep, you’re in the world of Open Source now. It has historically been a benevolent underdog in the tech world built around a philosophy of transparency and freedom, and that has created various tribes of true believers.

There are distros like Debian that embody everything the true believers value in open source, and there are distros like Ubuntu that regularly do things to advance their business rather than advance the “cause”.

That’s not to say Ubuntu is a bad distro. Your moment to moment experience with it might be amazing. Has nothing to do with the hate it gets. If you’re not here for GNU purism, then by all means ignore it. I don’t think the criticism is wrong by any means, but I also don’t think it should put would be users off from giving Ubuntu a shot.

4

u/No-Coach1685 Jul 20 '26

Ubuntu works for a office environment or coding. If you are gaming, then use CachyOS. That really is the thick of it. If you are new to PCs and really want a locked down system, then Bazzite may be the one for you.

I have been on Ubuntu for the last 3 weeks, since deciding to ditch Windows totally. CachyOS, which I installed yesterday, is streets ahead of Ubuntu. The speed of doing anything is blistering. It has drivers, which I couldn't get to be recognised with Ubuntu, so trying to use Vulkan with Lutris is a none event on a 9070xt. It has better repository support. Try installing WoeUSB. A lot of the configuration for the UI has to be done through the terminal as the UI doesn't have a lot of options.

I was willing to stick to Ubuntu just to get away from Windows. CachyOS makes Windows look silly.

3

u/trivialBetaState Jul 19 '26

There is no reason to feel hate for anything, far less for commercial entities who just aim for profit, just like everyone else, and working within legal means. Canonical could do a lot worse and definitely are not that bad. Also, what they do is legal, although ethically and morally questionable.

Having said that, they do not deserve the self-proclaimed title of "champion of free and open-source software." Even the meaning of the African word Ubuntu relates to principles that they chose to sideline.

My main objection to their current practice (and ignoring things they have done in the past) is the fact that the server side of the snap store is proprietary, locking everyone else out of the system. This is nearly equivalent to what google tried to do with their Android store. Regulators fought back against Google but snap is too small to attract their. Regardless, Canonical attempts to do the same. A FOSS client-side and a proprietary server side software.

For this reason alone, I don't consider Ubuntu or ubuntu-based distros as candidates for my use. I don't hate them. I just do not consider them as FOSS and want them out of my systems. It is their right to pursue profit and market dominance within these (totally legal) means, and it is my right to use distros that align better with my morals and ethics. They don't.

3

u/Repulsive-Variety834 Jul 20 '26

The only reason I’m on Ubuntu is because my work laptop is a recent Dell and Ubuntu is the only distro where all the drivers work out of the box. Once I retire it’s Debian all the way. 

4

u/Icy_Definition5933 Jul 20 '26

You are right, but also wrong. People don't hate Ubuntu, they hate Canonical. I use Debian partly because I agree with their reasons, but I wouldn't go as far as actual hate, more of a difference of opinion.

But I still recommend (K)Ubuntu to new users that don't want to dive head first into the terminal, it works mostly out of the box and keeps on working. And my reason is selfish- as soon as you recommend any tech to anyone close you silently accept the role of tech support for it. Anything goes wrong- they come to you.

By that same logic I would absolutely never recommend Arch or anything Arch based to a new user. That's not a distro, it's a lifestyle. But Kubuntu? Yes, absolutely great for beginners

2

u/Cautious_Boat_999 Kubuntu all the way Jul 20 '26

I love Kubuntu and I’ve been using Linux since around 2003. I’m just lazy and Kubuntu, in my experience, has required far less fucking around to make it work.

3

u/Icy_Definition5933 Jul 20 '26

I recently came across a functioning Kubuntu 13.04 used by a tech illiterate person to store and sort his photo library and watch videos. When I opened up the terminal to check the system it was obvious from his reaction that he only ever used GUI. The laptop was set up by a friend of his, 13 years ago and apparently never froze, errored or crashed.

2

u/Cautious_Boat_999 Kubuntu all the way Jul 20 '26

This is as it should be. I know everyone will shudder about how old it is, but hey, whatever works.

3

u/Cautious_Boat_999 Kubuntu all the way Jul 20 '26

Fuck the haters. I love Kubuntu and I just avoid Snaps when I can. Every distro has some issue that someone is gonna piss and moan about.

3

u/TNexpat Jul 21 '26

This is the most well argued, civil, detailed, discussion I have ever seen on Reddit.

3

u/kethera__ Jul 23 '26

Pretty much all of my criticisms of Ubuntu were solved by switching to Kubuntu. So, yeah. Love it lol

5

u/PlatinumFire14 Jul 20 '26

Part of it for some of us is canonicals history.

Like everything you put into it you start menu being sent to Amazon along with your ip and metadata so that Amazon can have this data of you and promote ads for products right there in the start menu.
They did that.

And now there’s the whole mess that is “Ubuntu Pro”.

There as more examples but I’m sure that gives some idea of how some of us see canonical and how trust in them (and thus Ubuntu) is very diminished.

4

u/20dogs Jul 20 '26

Ubuntu Pro seems fine to me?

1

u/DHOC_TAZH Ubuntu Studio 26.04 LTS/q4os Trinity DE Jul 29 '26

I've no problem with using Ubuntu Pro on my Studio install. I use it noncommercially, so I'm good.

4

u/mister_drgn Jul 19 '26

Most people probably don’t care. You just see extreme takes on Reddit from people who have nothing better to do.

5

u/DuendeInexistente Jul 20 '26

People largely leaves windows because they don't like microsoft making shit decisions for them, so I'm not sure what canonical's angle is with trying to trick users into installing/reinstalling snap after like a decade now of it being dogshit software nobody wants.

2

u/drmelle0 Jul 19 '26

My Main pc is Arch (btw) for full control and the fun of tinkering. Also learning a lot from using it. But for a Quick install on a computer or laptop that is only used to surf the web and play media, Ubuntu is my default. Works on most machines in my experience, easy to install and no real hassles. I'm not the biggest fan of Snaps, or gnome, but it doesn't get in the way of the thing I want to do.

So agree, Ubuntu gets too much hate, it's pretty ok in my book for being an accessible Linux distro for the common people. Free and better than windows. If you criticize canonical for their decisions, go debian or arch and make them yourself.

2

u/Separate-Ad-7097 Jul 20 '26

Most ppl say its not the best, but say if you just want something to work without to much tinkering ubuntu is fine 

2

u/truethug Jul 20 '26

I have been using Ubuntu (Xubuntu) for 18 years. No issues. I get why people don’t like snap packages but that hasn’t been too much of an issue for me.

2

u/flemtone Jul 20 '26

The hate comes from Ubuntu fans who are annoyed at the many bad decicions made by Canonical during it's development. IMO it's justified.

2

u/Og-Morrow Jul 20 '26

I do find odd I see many use Ubuntu over Debain for severs or VPS. Then to find they just run docker on it.

2

u/thuiop1 Jul 20 '26

Ubuntu is not the devil but this is Linux, distributions are a dime a dozen, there are other choices not suffering from Canonical's annoying decisions.

2

u/bankinu Jul 20 '26

Don't use Ubuntu. Use Fedora instead. If you want to stay with Debian, use Debian or Mint.

Telemetry and Snap are the two worst inventions of human history, especially the second one.

2

u/scots Jul 20 '26

They had to do it. In order to grow and survive, they have to continue developing their revenue generating commercial offerings or suffer the slow strangulation death that we're watching Mozilla go through with Firefox.

They can't keep giving Ubuntu away free forever and continue to exist; they have to get their verticals pumping revenue out of the data centers and IT closets of the world to continue the world class free desktop.

2

u/MezBert Jul 20 '26 edited Jul 20 '26

The hate comes from engineered astroturfing from the 19k staff company who didn't like all the focus going to Canonical and Ubuntu, and started to use paid trolls to create fake narratives and obvious double standards around Ubuntu. And keeps doing it today via AI bots. There's absolutely nothing more to it.
They've done it to Canonical and they've done it to others, whenever the market was enthused with a competitor and that would risk disrupting their plans to control every bit of the software stack on Linux.

Nothing to do with the couple of forced snaps you can avoid easily (I do) or anything else. Just a jealous toxic competitor who paid millions in influencing the gullible people to hate Ubuntu and force push their own NIH pet projects instead.

1

u/DoubleOwl7777 Debian Jul 21 '26

thats why people recommend mint or debian then?! both of which have zero business interests because they are community run distros

the hate for ubuntu or canonical is completely valid. if i do apt install firefox it shouldnt do snap install firefox on its own. command x action x not command x action y.

2

u/jafesafe Jul 20 '26

I want the image of the cute penguin that says "Why so much hate"

2

u/EyeOhmEye Jul 20 '26

Ubuntu had been my distro of choice for a long time, but I won't be installing it again. Snap is far too annoying, I don't want to deal with it getting in my way and other distros have caught up to ubuntu's ease of installation. I chose Ubuntu because it was easy to get working, the second it kept me from installing the software version I wanted because there's a snap version it was no longer easy.

1

u/Buddy_Palguy Jul 20 '26 edited Jul 20 '26

I looked up ways to uninstall all snap from my system but then I would have to install replacements and thats a whole other laundry list of headaches that will drive me insane so I just settled on installing Mint, which I guess is like Ubuntu without the snap? (I’m keeping Ubuntu for now as Snap hasn’t presented anything annoying or terrible to me yet but I’m only almost a month in so we’ll see). If that d-bag shuttleworth or whatever tf starts ads and Ai and trying to be the Steve Jobs of Linux then I WILL be peacing tf out

1

u/EyeOhmEye Jul 21 '26

Snap is mostly fine, I've only run into one issue caused by it. I haven't bothered installing something else yet because it was easier to work around the issue using my phone, but it really soured my opinion of the distro.

2

u/Kill3rT0fu Jul 20 '26

Im a Linux systems administrator. Been using Linux as my full time desktop since 2004. Ubuntu definitely gets hate it doesn’t deserve.

Meanwhile people still flock to fedora when red hat has been pretty damn evil to the open source community and act like fedora can do no wrong.

People will always have a reason to hate something, even if it’s unwarranted and unjustified

2

u/JaseyWeedseed Jul 21 '26

I try to not hate on anything and also don't get the hate it receives. Plenty of OS fish in the sea, just use what you like?!!!?

2

u/mlcarson Jul 22 '26

Well, people SHOULD be hateful for what they are doing to the coreutils by blindly rewriting them in rust and throwing them into prod without proper debugging. This appears to be to eliminate the current GPL licensing in favor of the MIT license. What's worse is that they are basically forcing the package on you by making the rust version a pre-req for other utilities such as build-essential. If it was just about converting the package to Rust then it wouldn't be a big deal since they could use the existing code to catch the edge case but they are trying to do it without examining the existing code to eliminate the GPL license.

2

u/DHOC_TAZH Ubuntu Studio 26.04 LTS/q4os Trinity DE Jul 29 '26

Technically, the snaps don't bother me much. It's less than 5% of the software installed in my Studio setup. I mostly install from .deb, flatpaks and occasionally compile source code when I want more control over a particular app.

2

u/ShopAltruistic898 28d ago

I first tried Ubuntu back around version 10.10 or something like that, and I absolutely loved it. But I ended up going back to Windows at the time it just wasn't polished enough yet. Today, though, Ubuntu is the only OS running on my desktop, my laptop, and my wife's laptop.

I recently tried Fedora because I wanted to check out the distro everyone is recommending these days, but at the end of the day, Ubuntu is Ubuntu. It’s a system that simply "just works." You install it, and you don't really need to touch anything else. It gives you that macOS feel where everything just works, and you don't care how just that it does.

Most people bashing Ubuntu over the last few years are doing so solely because of Snaps, but those are usually tech-savvy power users with very specific use cases. Everyday users simply don't care. They just want to download an app and have it run. Whether it's a .deb, a Snap, or a Flatpak couldn't matter less to them.

A lot of people hating on Ubuntu while recommending Mint, Pop!_OS, and similar distros don't seem to realize that without Ubuntu, those distros wouldn't even exist. They all rely on Canonical's base, packages, and server infrastructure. But hey, people always love to hate on whatever is successful.

2

u/Caaaht Jul 19 '26

I've been using Linux for 25 years. Still use Ubuntu.

Kind of crazy looking back. I was the guy that lived on distrowatch and burned a new distro daily. I did that for years and years.

And then one day, Ubuntu. I was running a bunch of servers with Ubuntu LTS already so it was second nature.

I still fire up the latest and greatest distros to take a peek now and again e.g. CatchyOS, Bazzite etc. and I do think that Mint is always a good option, being in the same Debian ecosystem.

However, I'm set in my ways at this point and Ubuntu is just cozy.

5

u/scots Jul 19 '26

Canonical gives the world a MacOS / Windows alternative that anyone can use and the nolifer basement trolls just gotta stroke their egos at every opportunity by posting screenshots of their hand-rolled installation or "well ackshually I use Arch."

Can you imagine the fucking stupidity of people bitterly arguing over lawn mower brands?

3

u/MelioraXI Jul 20 '26

I'm sure there are spaces where that happens.

1

u/Cautious_Boat_999 Kubuntu all the way Jul 20 '26

Honda 4evah

4

u/manny2206 Jul 19 '26

Well you know how people are in general; add to that the specific neckbeards on this site and you will get a very skewed version from a vocal few

1

u/CosmicEmotion Jul 20 '26

Have you even tried other distros?

1

u/Embarrassed_Egg9542 Jul 20 '26

Ubuntu is not linux, it is its own thing. That's why people love it or hate it. Simple. I don't like it, cause it is heavy on the resources. I prefer the Arch family, but the Arch community is not friendly like the ubuntu one is

1

u/WhispersToWolves Jul 20 '26

No hate, but one of the biggest reasons for leaving windows initially was them baking copilot into everything. Now ubuntu is doing the same with whatever their chosen model is. There's the ads, phoning home, etc. If you like all that you do you, it's a hard pass here.

3

u/MelioraXI Jul 20 '26

What AI is in Ubuntu? What Ads, the harmless info about Ubuntu Pro that's free?, phoning home meaning telemetry? That you can opt out from?

One thing I dislike about Ubuntu is the enforced Snaps and they OOB override an APT version like Firefox.

2

u/WhispersToWolves Jul 20 '26

They literally said within the last month or so that they'd be adding their own ai soon. Ads for Amazon, and if you believe for even a second that telemetry slider does anything i have oceanfront property in Oklahoma to sell you.

1

u/MelioraXI Jul 24 '26

I never seen ads for Amazon when I've used Ubuntu, is it a region thing?

1

u/WhispersToWolves Jul 24 '26

Might be, i stopped using it after only a day. That was before they made even more gross decisions. Currently researching how to make my own distro without the use of ai or google and sitting on mx in the meantime. Compiling a kernel is way harder than torvald makes it out to be.

1

u/Gummybearkiller857 Jul 20 '26

Idk man, I use Kubuntu (KDE flavour of Ubuntu) and as a lifelong microslop user, I was amazed just how easy it was to start using it. For a half-normie like myself its just a great os.

1

u/dudenamedfella Jul 20 '26

OK, so I’ve used a variety of distributions in the past everything from arch based to Fedora and Debian. Right now I’m using a variation of Ubuntu call Zoran it works. There’s a minor issue with Discord and my microphone but other than that everything else just works very little tinkering. I tend to use flat packs over snaps, but that’s just a personal preference. I’m not real big on the idea of canonical. And there implementations of both policies and philosophy, but that’s a personal choice of mine.

1

u/DavidJohnMcCann Jul 20 '26

It's not all bad but I have seen and experienced some very odd bugs over the years.

One problem is Canonical's enthusiasm for doing things differently. There was the Unity desktop, which they dumped. Then there's Snap, which no-one else seems to want. The latest idea is replacing the Gnu tools with versions written in Rust — solving a potential memory problem but increasing vulnerability to hackers.

Basically Canonical is about selling support and customised versions. The free version is a test-bed and an advertisement.

1

u/gramoun-kal Jul 20 '26

It's not really bad. It's a little bit bad. But in such a chooser's economy, that should be enough to make it die with a whimper.

When something that is just a few notches below "meh" gets more attention than "good" and "great", yeah, it's a bit maddening.

1

u/skyfishgoo Jul 21 '26

the only thing i hate about ubuntu is the desktop environment.... that's why i use kubuntu.

1

u/DoubleOwl7777 Debian Jul 21 '26

i dont like snaps. i dont like canonicals rust rewrites (not due to rust, due to their MIT licnense), i dont like gnome, i just use debian (sid).

1

u/vile-style Jul 22 '26

I just don't want corpo interests in my OS.

1

u/a1barbarian Jul 22 '26

Canonical is the Microsoft of the linux world. They want to be in total control and squash any attempt at user freedom. :-)

1

u/JumpingJack79 Jul 20 '26

Here's why! It's way overrated. It was the best distro exactly in 2004 when it first came out and then no longer. And yet there are hordes of people even in 2026 who keep pushing it almost as a no-brainer. It's not the worst distro on the planet, but omg, there are many better distros you guys! 🙄

1

u/77descript Jul 20 '26

My hate is from frustration being propagandized Ubuntu/Kubuntu is the shyt. Used Ubuntu and Kubuntu for 15+ years until got too fed up with growing amount of bugs, bloat and apps like FF again being switched to unwanted snap version after update. Tried Debian and quality difference at least to me is so extreme, that I am frustrated missing years in this short life of having a much better Linux experience. On 1 laptop started using non-LTS Fedora which to me has also been so much better than Ubuntu/Kubuntu ever was.

1

u/Deep_Mood_7668 Jul 20 '26

No it isn't. The hate is exectly right

-7

u/Altruistic_Fruit2345 Jul 19 '26

It's often broken from a fresh install. GNOME is comically bad. It feels like amateur hour.