Examples could be things like specific configuration defaults or general decision-making in leadership.
What would you change?
Examples could be things like specific configuration defaults or general decision-making in leadership.
What would you change?
honestly canonical has always been like this.
what do you suggest for an alternative thats similar to ubuntu?
The common recommendation is Linux Mint, but there are lots of Ubuntu derivatives out there. Another common recommendation is Debian or a Debian derivative, and those will generally be similar to Ubuntu since Debian is the upstream of Ubuntu.
You can feel free to ignore it if you aren’t open to other options, but my personal distro recommendation for a Gnome-based desktop is Fedora. It has a much quicker update cycle, so you’ll actually get feature updates on your packages (which is great if you use neovim plugins, since the neovim packages in the Ubuntu repos are ancient at this point, or you know, any other package that benefits from being updated). Of course it obviously isn’t as bleeding edge as Arch, though I personally see that as a benefit because I found Arch to be unstable (haven’t really experienced any instability with Fedora in the past few years though). But don’t be mistaken, I’m not saying Fedora is similar to Ubuntu, just providing an alternative perspective since you seem to be open to switching to a different distro (though the differences may be more minor than you think from an end-user perspective).
BTW, Linux Mint isn’t just a “beginner distro”, it’s perfectly fine for anyone to use, and it fixes a lot of the Canonical BS from Ubuntu. I feel like some people get caught up in the thought that Mint is the distro that you ditch for another one when you become more comfortable with Linux, but that doesn’t have to be the case.
There where Times when Ubuntu was Marks baby, but nowadays with pro, advertisement and tracking in the terminal an AppStore, everything has to have a businesscase.
I would recommend just plain Debian either with flatpak or in the testing branch. It’s almost the same, stable as a rock and driven by a community.
if i understand correctly the testing branch is similar to ubuntu non-lts?
Somewhat but it is a rolling release. Packages will be major-updated constantly.
is it stable?
Yes it runs quite stable. But the packages and their configuration can change.
If you’re looking for something more conservative, the stable branch fits better but on a desktop it’s very old (like an Ubuntu lts)
thats precisely my problem with debian stable, but id be ok with testing if it doesnt break unpredictably with regular updates.
On my side it’s running since years without problems. I would never use arch on a business workstation with debian testing I see no problems at all.
then i might as well just test it
Going upstream to Debian