Recently, I switched from Windows to Linux, tried many distros, and ended up with the Ubuntu rolling-release. Things went well for some days, but I started facing some issues like printer issues, gaming performance issues, and overall Ubuntu performance issues. So, I switched to where it all started, which is Windows 10. Now I’m on Windows, but the likeness and pleasure of using Linux are still with me. 

So, what I wanted was a faster, rolling-release, easy-to-use distro with easy installation of Nvidia proprietary drivers. 

What I have now planned is Fedora, because I like it. The issue with Fedora is that I can easily install the Nvidia driver, unlike Ubuntu. Can I search for the driver in the store or something else?

Or anything better than a fedora.

Graphics card: GT 730. I quit gaming, so gaming was not an issue anymore.

  • MrBubbles96@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    So, what I wanted was a faster, rolling-release, easy-to-use with easy installation of Nvidia proprietary drivers

    EndeavourOS. It’s Arch-based, so it’s a rolling release, the install Nvidea driver option is right on the boot menu when you first install, it’s easy to use (and easy to install) and has a Wecome tool to help you navigate if you’re not used to Arch. And, at least in my experience, it’s fast

    There’s some drawbacks tho. It’s on the lighter side: good if you wanna pick and choose what you wanna have on your system, not so good if you want something that’s ready to go OOTB. Another thing is most of the action takes place in the Terminal, hence the “terminal-centric distro” thing. That’s easily fixable tho, since you can either re-enable your Discover shop (KDE), the Gnome software center’s already good to go, or just install Octopi or Pamac if you really don’t wanna use the terminal for stuff.

    Give it a go if you. It cured my distrohopping and basically ensured I’ll never go back to Windows (long term anyways. Temporarily, well, sometimes you gotta).

    • Jayb151@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’ve been running endeavour on a little tablet PC with kde. It’s been pretty great overall, but I’ve also gotten interested in Manjaro. Thoughts on how they compare? I read one article that was like, whatever you like better!

      • MrBubbles96@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Manjaro is…tricky.

        I’ve called it an Arch based distro that kinda sucks at being an Arch based distro before, and I stand by that. You can’t treat Manjaro like you would EndeavourOS or Vanilla Arch Linux because of how Manjaro decides to do things: essentially, updates are held back by a couple of weeks for better and worse instead of being released as they’re made avaliable. While that means it can catch disastrous things like the GRUB issue another user pointed out (Manjaro was unaffected by it IIRC), it also means the system is prone to breaking itself more often. You can forget about using the AUR if you’re using Manjaro–or well, you can, but the AUR and Manjaro are nortorious for not playing nice with one another because of the latter’s tendencies to hold back packages.

        Personally, I wouldn’t recomended. I had more trouble with Pop_Os!, yeah (even tho i can admit that’s my favorite spin of Gnome 3), but Manjaro just tested my patience more than anything else. However, If you don’t mind being extra careful with what you install (really that’s standard practice for any distro, but hey, I’ve never found a WIP package that messed up my system anywhere other than when using Manjaro, so make of that what you will), are willing to tolerate constant mild to severe breakage, and just using Flatpaks and appimages over the AUR, then give Manjaro a try.

        • Jayb151@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          That’s all great info, thanks for taking the time. This is my first go with Arch based. I work with Windows for a living and have used Debian based for years.

          Endeavor has had a little bit of a learning curve, but sounds like I’ll be sticking with it.

          I know they say they are a terminal based os, but any tips on some equivalent to a software center, or at least where I can find compatable apps?

          Thanks for what you’ve already taken the time to write!

          • MrBubbles96@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Pamac (either pamac-all or pamac-all-no-snap). You can go with Octopi if you want, but pamac should more than meet your needs–and personally, I like it better.

    • I scrolled to find this. EndeavourOS has done a great job at making Arch easy to install, and you get the best of both worlds.

      I ran base Arch for years on a laptop, then went to Artix to lighten the load when systemd started misbehaving in odd ways. But I’m really liking the EndeavourOS experience.

      Good choice!

    • sorrybookbroke@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      He’s looking for a distro with an easier install method when it comes to the nvidia drivers. EndeavorOS is arch based, and is the antithesis of easy. It’s just a graphical arch installer.

      I use arch myself, but it takes alot of manual interventions to keep working. Look at the grub issue causing black screens, the repo swap, or the linux kernal that caused laptops with intel chips to flash full brightness on their screens backlight, that could have broken the screen, requiring a downgrade until it was fixed. Arch is fantastic, but it’s like a toddler you have to continuously keep from running head first into traffic at times. If they’re ok with that I’d say go full send. Endeavor is a fantastic distro

      I’d argue fedora, or nobara, are great options. Same with opensuse tumbleweed. No idea what the issue is on those systems with nvidia drivers though sadly, so I couldn’t help

      • MrBubbles96@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I wouldn’t go as far as calling Arch the antithesis of easy (tho you are right that it’s like a toddler you have to constantly babysit. Don’t like that part, but I wanna say that’s most rolling releases, no? Plus I haven’t found a stable release that i jive with either, so nothing left but to tolerate it), but then again, that varies from person to person. After all, I struggled much more with Pop_Os! (in general) and Fedora (more growing pains than anything) than I ever did with Arch, and I’m an idiot when it comes to computers–pretty good at looking up answers to problems tho lol

        Issues are pretty mixed IMO. There are ones beyond our control like the GRUB one and the backlight one, can’t really do much about them (but I’m not gonna pretend it’s only an Arch thing. Every distro messes up once in a while) except sit tight until there’s a fix…or well, you could try and fix it yourself, but then we lead to the other thing, in my expierence, anyways: 90% of issues happen because the user messed with something. Not even something obvious, i mean mucking about within the systems guts for one reason or another without knowing what you’re doing. I’ve since adopted a golden rule: you don’t bother the PC, it doesn’t bother you. Personally, haven’t had problems besides the backlight one, and even that was fixed quickly.

        Regarding Tumbleweed and Fedora, they’re good options, but installing nvidea drivers isn’t super straightforward. Would have still recommended Fedora, or even better, Mint if they hadn’t said they were looking for a Rolling Release, actually. Nobora should be easier, or so I’ve heard. Never actually tried it myself.

        • sorrybookbroke@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I can understand your point of view, and I’ll admit "the antithesis of easy is an over-exaggeration. I’d like to argue against the isldea of arch being too similar to other rolling releases, or semi-rolling like fedora. Though you’re right, they can all be road wanderers at times

          As for the things out of our control like grub and the kernal screen bug, they didn’t hit fedora, tumbleweed, or many other semi-rolling or rolling releases. This is, of course, due to the fact that arch is here to find these problems first. Also, the others don’t have as many manual interventions like the repo migration, or the package migrations that happen a few times yearly. This is entirely within the control of arch, though I do like how it’s handled

          That last one is a philosophical idea which I agree with, don’t mess with what could be configured for a reason, but if you don’t follow the mailing list you may find your system breaking more often than the others.

          Though arch is fantastic, and no matter what I try out I seem to always find my way back to it, It is a uniquely challanging toddler to babysit

          • MrBubbles96@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            That Arch basically tanks a lot of those problems so that other rolling distros don’t deal with them is something that i hadn’t considered till now, tho you are right there.

            Yeah, I’ve tried going to Tumbleweed or other distros, and I just keep coming back to my XFCE + Arch combo. Dunno, it just speaks to me ig.