Thats fair. I’ve jumped that ship a while back.
I checked and they seem to use wayland by default on gnome at least

Funny that the printer was the thing that cemented the shift. Ive either been really lucky or linux is much better than windows for printers

Havent installed debian with a desktop environment in a long time. If its still default then its just that, default… meaning you could change it

As the other reply said, Fedora and RHEL harbor the same problem as Ubuntu in terms of corporate backing.
They’re all as stable at it gets when it comes to linux distros; all those “server distributions”.

I guess people recommend debian because that’s what they know. It’s got the biggest community, so the most support.
Nothing against Rocky, but i wont recommend it if i’ve never used it.

Unstable is pretty damn stable, feels arch-y to me, and arch rarely has issues. If there are issues they’re fixed fast.
Testing is the middle ground. Tested for a bit by unstable peeps but thats it.

People dont hate on ubuntu cause its inherently bad. They hate on it because its a corporate distro and they do some questionable stuff sometimes. The OS runs fine.

Why not debian unstable? Its better than ubuntu in pretty much every way imo. Somewhat less user friendly i guess.

The standard is to have dotfiles in your ~/.config folder, however not all apps follow that.
Some apps dump their config files in your home, others only have files in /etc or /usr and you have to copy them yourself to modify them

That sort of thing is another great reason to love nix.

Thank you for the reply :)

I did some research on guix when i was deciding which one of the two i was going to try as a daily driver.
My conclusion was that choosing guix would mean choosing a smaller community and amount of support for a better language.

Would love your opinion if youve done your research on it. Why choose guix over nixos?

Nixos.
The ability to have my whole system in a git repo is what i have been looking for when i did not know it.
Steep freaking curve though and the documentation kinda blows. But its the distro ive spent the longest on apart from Arch, and i feel quote at home even though most stuff is done differently.

In my opinion what hes saying is true, but has to be taken with a grain of salt. The choice of the word “pointless” is a little harsh but i understand what he means. They are only derivatives that dont accomplish anything that the distro they forked cant accomplish, ergo they are useless because you could make Ubuntu on debian.
As for why debian and arch are the best, they are the two most well established community maintained distros. That means they have the most people working on them, the most support out there on the internet when you encounter issues, they tend to be the most stable, AND they have no corporate backing which can be seen as “evil” by some people (like Chris in this video).

Being a beginner distro doesnt make mint any less linuxy. Its probably the gest recommendation to convert people over from windows