Strong opinions exists within community about specific Linux distributions resulting with many arguments. Notably, many "bad" (either poorly maintained or following flawed strategies) or difficult to use (for historical or design reasons) are heavily advertised.
Idea distribution is boring to a point of not being sure what is it. OS is tool allowing actual work or play. Distributions which require manual setup, care during routine operations, compiling packages from source or expert knowledge are not meant for daily use for most.
Recommended Linux distributions
Ubuntu
Overall great distribution, both Desktop and Server version. Stable and secure, no-nonsense distribution.
Further details regarding UbuntuFedora KDE
Great quality KDE Plasma distribution. Rapid release scheme and short support of each release make Ubuntu and its stable flavors more appropriate for most users.
Further details regarding Fedora KDEXubuntu
Great quality Ubuntu flavor. Notable issue regarding XFCE itself is lack of official method to move window between monitors.
Further details regarding XubuntuopenSUSE Leap
Quality distribution although it requires manual setup of media codecs.
Further details regarding openSUSE LeapNotable Linux distributions
Kubuntu
Reputable Ubuntu KDE Plasma flavor. I've used it for few years before 24.04 where it promptly stopped booting reliably, not corrected at the time of writing (2024-06-30).
Further details regarding KubuntuKDE neon
Distribution by authors of KDE Plasma. First to get newest KDE Plasma version... and experience any issues.
Further details regarding KDE neonDebian
Stable and lightweight. Strong push towards not including frequently required proprietary hardware firmware. Due to reluctance to update packages users commonly use unsafe testing releases, losing one of primary benefits (stability). Often struggles to offer web browser working straight after install.
Fedora
Fast updating distribution. Adopted unusual release life-cycle leading to have no stability benefits of point release distributions nor "bleeding edge" of rolling releases.
openSUSE Tumbleweed
"Bleeding edge" rolling release distribution that does not require DIY, everything is ready to be used out of the box. "Sane" alternative to Arch.
Arch
Do-It-Yourself, "bleeding edge" rolling release distribution. You tell system how to install itself. Included installer is not supported by Arch community itself. Expect system to break if you skip on reading release notes or just... forgo updating for too long.
Gentoo
Do-It-Yourself, compile everything yourself distribution. Allows user TOTAL control of how today's security updates for their browser will be built/downloaded (if downloaded, there's no point of using Gentoo though). Requires expert knowledge and high performance device to be installed and kept up-to-date. Since user compiles kernel, precise adjustments to configuration flags can be applied.
Unrecommended Linux distributions
Those distributions are not recommended due to various mishaps. Although one could argue that those specifically listed here were not that important, they are noted here because they happened often enough to be deemed a symptom of more broad issues with distribution maintenance/packaging.
Manjaro
Flawed by design (delays its base - Arch - packages updates for 2 weeks "for improved stability"), tens of "accidental" DDoS attacks on AUR infrastructure [1] [2], multiple missed certificate updates [3], extremely frequent total system breakages. Worse Arch with exact same shortfalls as Arch (reading update patches and following guidelines is not optional, which happens daily and if ignored will result in system unable to update). Website aggregating issues with Manjaro maintenance
Mint
History of Desktop Experience (Cinnamon) with login as root bypass (that was up for years) [1] , low chances of successful updates (including regular, day-to-day security updates), was hacked to distribute virus in installation media [2]
Pop_OS!
History of issues with packaging (for example, system-destructive Steam package [1] - they are the ones that make it so, by accident - which prompted them to propose bad change to apt instead of fixing their package [2] ) and intentionally sparkling conflicts in FOSS community [3] [4] (tl;dr - they take others work (upstream - Ubuntu/GNOME), fix things then poke fun at Ubuntu/GNOME for not having that bugs fixed)
Other
Last update: 2024-06-30