Distrowatch lists MX origin as “Greece, USA”, but likely have developers from both the US and the EU mainly.

I would not consider MX a branch of antiX. Some developers are also working on antiX so they likely share the same ideology (mainly anti-capitalism), but while antiX is explicitly affirming so, MX, instead, keeps a neutral political tone on its portal and its communications on everything non-linux related.

I had used MX and it is a well-rounded distro, totally recommended in in a computer older than a decade, you don’t like systemd, like Debian but dislike anything Ubuntu or if you like any of the specific tools they ship with MX with. Also, knowing the ideology of some of their developers, if you despise big-brother, this distro should be less likely to be compromised than, lets say Fedora or Nobara.

Likely there is a combination of factors:

First, as MX is catered mostly for a bit aged computers, it is likely the demographics of users are a bit more aged that other distros like CachyOS (which by the way, it is now in the crest of a wave, signaling Distrowatch ranking is not correlated with market share.)

Also, the fact that many of us are pondering about MX’s high ranking, we are also clinking on it more that we would on Ubuntu or Mint so feeding the impressions count.

Similarly, when a post like this is brought up, a bunch of use go to Distrowatch and click on it to see info about MX.

Also a regional popularity must be at place… distrowatch probably is more prevalent is certain countries that MX is favored. I don’t see many in Asia using MX for instance, so western distrowatch distorts its global popularity. For instance if 3 users in the US use Mint and 3 MX but in China, that they barely go to distrowatch, 3 use Mint and 0 MX, distrowach would rank globally MX and Mint as same while in reality, Mint is clearly in top globally.

Of course, it is also likely MX developers have a bit of incentive of clicking on Distrowatch for their baby… I don’t find it particularly too bad since many developers are doing far worse things… Using bots and dozens of different IPs would trespass the ethical boundaries for me though! MX is not the only ones that could potentially be doing this… it is not possible that Arch or Kubuntu are raked way bellow Q4OS, Lite, or Bluestar for instance. I see some artifacts among top famed distros too. It reminds me of the VW diesel scandal… VW was cheeting, but all other car makers were manipulating in one way or another their emissions too, it is just that US found it convenient to go for the foreign low hanging fruit.

Best thing is for us to stop reading those rankings as anything more than distros that trend up and down and that is it. I categorize all distros we all hear about, from MX to Cachy, from Nobara to deepin all as equally competitive and the difference just catered to the needs of different users. The more unwarranted credit we give to these rankings, the more incentive we are given to manipulations.

I have seen your posts here for a few months and you are far more knowledgeable than I am in Linux. However, I have to say I disagree here. I did use Slowroll for two months and found no problem, nor a need for much wikis, if any… now, I dont have nvidia so maybe that is why. The main developer of Slowroll is awesome (personable and reachable) and his professionalism is what make him not categorize his Slowroll as stable so it is not listed as such. He has previously mentioned the challenges he is facing with the concept, but that can be addressed in due time. Most people in OpenSUSE should use either Tumbleweed or Leap for now.

Regarding OpenSUSE, it is a tad behind Fedora in refinement but minimal. Its biggest handicap, however, is its small footprint in the Linux marketplace, yet still amazing what they had pulled off with their limited resources.

Your beloved Mint, oh gosh, how much I tried to like it, but aesthetics and lack of flexibility kills it for me. It is, hands down, the less problem free one, no questions, it is what I recommend most for someone that need a set-it-and-forget-it distro, Mint is still the one. But I just cannot work happy with Cinnamon, even when first started in Linux. One system in the same ubuntu branch that I found almost as reliable as Mint, but with fairly new KDE, is TuxedoOS; more stable than Kubuntu, a bit less than Mint, and close in freshness as Fedora/OpenSUSE Tumbleweed

By using Fedora, one helps Red Hat/IBM in different ways:

• With more usage of Fedora, Linux enthusiasts cater to that distro more and more, and Red hat benefits from all that feedback and large customer base. Fedora gets better and Red Hat stands out over the competition.
• With larger customer base, Red Hat’s board approve to allocate more resources to the platform, increasing its competitive advantage.
• With more users of Fedora, Red Hat can find more qualified professionals that grew up using already Fedora, increasing its human capital competitive advantage.

Customer base, paying or no, is a tremendous competitive advantage… that is why Microsoft winked at piracy across the globe for 2 decades so companies purchased their solutions since millions of users already knew how to use them. Of course, once the competition was out, Microsoft started to hike prices tremendously.

Of course, the development of Fedora, since it is FOSS, benefits all the community, but it also feeds the monster in the process that, at the moment they want, they pull the rug on the community that, at that stage, won’t have any companies that can take the lead anymore.

The moral here, if behind Fedora is a company that did bad things for FOSS, that it is owned by a company that contributes with the IDF, and both are based in a country that any day may ban Red hat technology to be distributed to any foreign country of their choosing… why choosing Fedora when plenty of alternatives are equally comparable, more ethical and less prone to manipulation.

That was 3 years ago. I understand they made a mistake (twice) but ok since then. I think most of the Manjaro criticism is no longer warranted. All distros had made mistakes.

For those of us that despise Red Hat, sorry, but increasing the user base of Fedora, dramatically helps Red Hat’s marketability and profitability (and IBM’s). These companies not only make decisions bad for the FOSS community but way too happy to do business with a country massacring kids as we speak too. Now, I still recommend using Fedora since, as you say they are not straight IBM and they are at the vanguard, yet, for those with a conscience on these matters, there are as equally comparable offers out there.

OpenSUSE Tumbleweed is pretty solid and 98% of the refinement of Fedora, that in my opinion, it is the most polished of them all. Now, using Fedora supports companies like Red Hat/IBM so it is a no-no for me.

The only thing OpenSUSE has is that is independent so does a few things differently than Debian or Fedora based ones, but after a few retouches that you will learn in no time you will be at the level of Fedora. It is perfectly OK for beginners, just that there are a few things differently, sometimes for the better like many utilities from YAST, but will be different from what you find in most non OpenSUSE forums. Again, is minimal, 95% of the staff is the same. Unfortunately, it does not have the costumer base that Ubuntus/Mint/Fedora has, but the supporters are technically highly committed and competent, they just need to improve in their marketing arena that is what is holding them down.

Another KDE that I like is TuxedoOS. It works perfectly in non Tuxedo devices and very stable in my experience… I even had better stability experience than Kubuntu, and that says a lot.

Did not play enough with Manjaro and will try in a few days. It had some bad press but I think is more due to diverging a bit from Arch philosophy of instant updates than anything else. CachyOS I recommend only for latest computers or those willing to adjust things a bit once in a while.

For older devices, MXLinux KDE is the ideal in integrated graphics chips.

For the new people on Linux, think of my impression playing with the different OS;

Similarities between Windows 10 and macOS is around 15%.

Similarities between Windows 10 and Linux Mint is around 20%.

Similarities between Linux Mint and Ubuntu is around 95%.

Similarities between Linux Mint and Fedora\OpenSUSE is around 90%.

Similarities between Linux Mint and Arch\CachyOS\Manjaro is around 85%.

And with Flatpaks/Snaps I would even now narrow the difference in the Linus OS as 95, 92 and 90% similarity. For what linux cannot do for you, unless it needs high processing or gaming anticheats, a Virtual Machine with Windows will just cover you without any problem.

What makes look different in Linux is the desktop environment (KDE, Gnome, Cinnamon…), no much the distro per se. Find the distro environment you like after playing 20min with it, and choose the Linux flavor you are ideologically/persuaded with the most… don’t worry about the rest.

Coming from Windows, OK with a bit of tech journey and into gaming here is my take in no order of preference.

1. TuxedoOS if you are inclined to Debian/Ubuntu side. Slow updates but it has latest KDE and very stable in my experience.
2. If you just want set and forget (minimal updates) Linux Mint (Ubuntus fall here too) Now, it is not very appealing aesthetics.
3. Fedora. Probably the best overall, but if you have beef against IBM/Red Hat, ditch it, its superiority is very marginal. Gamers like the spin Nobara, some performance increase but minimal.
4. Arch is not that unstable as portrayed, but one time in a critical time is bad enough, even if very rarely occurs. You assess your risk. The popular baby today is Arch’s CachyOS due to catering to gamers.
5. OpenSUSE’s Tumbleweed is maintained quite good and very close to Fedora in being perfect overall, but fewer people behind and less support. I would only go with it if you have a specific reason why (German, Yast tools, rolling release but stable,…)

At the end, like many people say, it is likely you will hop… until one day you find that distro hoping is pointless and that all are actually very close to each other and could easily coexist with any of them all. The difficult and uncompromising aspect usually is with the desktop environment like KDE Plasma, Gnome, Cinnamon…

I haven’t play much with them but this is my take:

Deepin. (Just released v25) Based on Debian. Community distro. Very well done and very modern look. It is heavy though and the beta I tried had glitches. Being primarily developed in Chinese though one can tell English was added later. If they only dedicated a bit more effort on languages it would be amazing. It is as much different from Linux Mint as it gets… for better or for worse, but I like their take.

Ubuntu Kylin. Institutional cooperation with Canonical. Haven’t tried it. It is just Ubuntu catering their offer to the Chinese market. If you like Ubuntu’s or Mint and you language is Chinese, this is for you.

OpenKylin. Fully Independent (No Debian, Arch…). Community distro. Its usage for now seems to be more for institutions though.

There are others but for niches.

China, of course, it want to get independent from MS and Apple so in the next years is going to push heavily for alternative OS so it will be interesting to see what, and for sure, our FOSS community will benefit from that as DeepSeek benefited the AI.

We don’t know and, let us be frank, due to the nature of the community, it is impossible to know… Distros could report the downloads but if it became a KPI, it will be abused right away.

Fedora is well funded and probably the best overall. Now, its ties to US and IBM/Red Hat will keep it constrain in growth.

OpenSUSE is a second contender in funding and best overall, but German branding has taken a deep these last years… I know the government actions should be separate but, in reality, is that SUSE as a company will be constrained in growth too, therefore OpenSUSE. Its community need to be more global too.

Debian is king still. Much of development depends on the previous 2. However, in spite of huge progress lately, still not the best for new Linux users. That is why Linux Mint, Ubuntus, TuxedoOS still exist, but their growth won’t be much as Debian gets better and better, but always a step behind the corporate funded ones. For today

The Chinese Linux offerings are becoming well funded are very interesting… but there is a bridge to cross that most of the world still not ready to cross… partly, because there are reasons to be skeptical since the community developing it is highly regional, partly is just plain racism. It is a pity, because these would have the biggest potential for a mayor breakthrough with all that money and human capital pouring from different companies, but I don’t see it capable of breaching that regional aspect.

Finally we have Arch. I see it better positioned for future than Debian TBH, but we are talking 5 years down the line. It won’t be Arch though, it will be some new variant like CachyOS is doing today that brings Arch to the public… maybe KDE’s new bet?!

And to answer the OP more directly, what do you give up by using a GrapheneOS (besides being forced to buy a Google device), well, no much since you have the option of installing Google services in a second profile or compartmentalized in your main profile. This, of course, would have your device communicating with Google’s servers, but the info it can collect would mostly restricted. MicroG is potentially more private than creating a Google account (even if an anonymous one), but some claim is less secure too so I leave it as equal.

In conclusion, if you can live without installing Google services or juts just need it so sporadically that you only need to install it in a secondary profile, and you tolerate a Google Pixel go with GrapheneOS option. If, however, you are not a fan at all of having a Pixel, or need to have Google services constantly running, I would consider instead iodéOS, /e/, etc.

By the way… some opinions after dealing with their managers:

• GrapheneOS.… not friendly but they genuinely seen to care about their service. These type of devotion for a cause usually brings these type of developers.
• CalyxOS. The friendlier and approachable. Amazing human beings overall.
• /e/. French usually create a distinct world… they are hard to collaborate with but I fully believe in the difference they bring to the table. Wish they were more accommodating to the global market though. I don’t think any of them they would compromise their product for any government or monetary incentive.

After years of observing privacy OS for the phones, this is my conclusion on Phones’ operative systems:

· Android variants locked by a telephone carrier are absolutely the worse, both in privacy and security.

· The rest of OEM Android variants come next, absolutely bad on privacy, but also in security since most phones carry updates for very limited time.

· Newer Google phones (Pixels) at least have several years with security patches, in privacy still bad though.

· iPhones… Good with security (as Google’s) and in privacy… well, it depends; with 3rd party apps is quite good, but Apple has full control of everything and, since it is not opensource… Who knows what it does or does not. Now, there has not been cases brought to justice as evidence from what Apple claims is encrypted end-to-end so there is that. However, if I am an US intelligence agency I would also prefer to have a minimal access to iPhones reserved to critical cases and never reveal that to the public by using it as evidence in courts than revealing my access to iPhones and consequentially destroying the entire scheme permanently (and a trillion dollar industry!). In brief, iPhones are an acceptable device for the average consumer or those with minimal ‘phone hygiene’, but, for instance, certain high-stake journalists, politicians and organizers should however avoid them.

· Then we have these customized Android OS; The OP has included I great continuously updated site listing them. However, that list is too detailed for most since just a single app you install can place the entire privacy benefits of these OS pointless. There is no need to mention GrapheneOS is the one who, point by point, take privacy and security to the maximum level, while the others, in different degrees, try to bring some short of compromise with compatibility. With GrapheneOS’s recent compartmentalization of Google apps option, it has really dented competitors like LineageOS, /e/, etc… Now, I have to say, if I were a high-stake journalist, I would think twice using a Google Pixel device (the only one that work with GrapheneOS)… I trust GrapheneOS software, but what the Google chip could potentially do, no so much. I would trust more sending a secured message in a Sony device loaded with /e/ at the cost of not having updates (unless someone is being able to have physically access to it that is, if the device is in the hands of an adversary, I trust a Pixel 7 one thousand times than any Sony Xperia 5… I hope you understand what I mean. Any of these OS are** the best option for those that have an acceptable phone hygiene (choosing apps with some rigor and giving them access only for what it is needed)**.

· Finally there are the non Android based, mainly based on Linux. Linux Touch, PureOS, etc. but none has ever got beyong an experimental stage. I had really rooted for Sailfish OS since its very beginning, but unfortunately, most of them came much earlier when the market wasn’t demanding them, and now that the market demands for these, the effort and funds had been completely depleted on those types of initiatives. What puzzles my is how mid-sized phone companies never funded these privacy initiatives (looking at you Sony Ericsson , HMD’s Nokia, Alcatel…, they should have been able to have forecasting this trend since Snowden.)

To conclude, I just wanted to say, for the community, no so much for the individual, the importance of number of users in an OS/App and, paradoxically, the diversity in the market too. Market size for an opensourced OS is critical, because it increases the chances of being constantly audited… I am sorry, but the overwhelming majority of opensource OS and apps do no go through any audit at all (hopefully will put an AI scrutinize all these soon!) so they give a false sense of being non-malicious. But diversity is important too… Everyone relying on GrapheneOS alone, although considered trusted today, would be dangerous and would be bad from multiple fronts; Google may be compelled to lock bootloaders, governments may introduce backdoors for the chips since dealing with 1 manufacturer is easier to deal in secrecy with 6, GrapheneOS could relax its fight for privacy if there was no competition, etc… So, the mere existence of different OS CalixOS, SailfishOS, iodéOS, ect… Benefits all of us, even if not used by you.

I have to give it that the Fedora distros are a slightly bit superior to Ubuntu variants but for those that value some degree of not favoring corporate US (IBM/Red Hat) that provides AI resources for Israel’s military to do what it is doing… Myself I tried to like Mint, I really did… but could not… not just it is old-fashioned looking but has limitations with scaling and others.

Now, I do recognize for the initiators is it great! Now, for those that find Mint ugly I recommend TuxedoOS… I find it as good as Kubuntu but without its known limitations with flatpaks. Yes, TuxedoOS was created for Tuxedo laptops but they left it open to use it with others so no problems at all and very well maintained. Now, you may want remove the Tuxedo app that they installed just to free some resources… a 10-seconds thing to do. Drawback is servers in Germany so a bit slower updates than usual for most.

True… we should identify those users using just the browser and basic word processor operations. Make sure their printers are well connected and they will notice barely any changes at all… Us, power users, are who actually struggle with the conversion so we tend not to persuade non power users because we think we will bring them similar headaches.

If the user uses just browser and a word editor, he/she is ready since 8 years ago without any mayor hiccup.

Glad for you. It is not as easy as they paint it, specially here, but moving to Linux still good in so many aspects and I applaud you for doing so. Hold on tight on the ride, it is frustrating sometimes but worth it overall.

I see we are not going nowhere here, but I highly appreciate your effort to make me understand your view. Russia and China, let alone Cuba, Venezuela, Iran etc al want to develop an alternative from Android… how is it going? Only China is pulling it off, and after 5 years already and massive investment… just forking sure…

Just as a remark… “cannot legally become closed source”. Do you really think the US is bound by any legality at this point?! And it is not just Trump… any President could scrap off any legality if it need be and lower courts could just complain all the want… Of the 100+ lawsuit cases Trump already has accumulated in 3 months you won’t see much progress… and recently, even the US Supreme Court already gave Presidents “Broad Immunity for Official Acts” and “Absolute Immunity for Core Powers” so good luck for upholding GPL if an administration wants to force software out of it.

I am still no able to get my message through.

Of course, it is easy to fork, is that when you depend solely on a entity that it is prone to abandon you, you wont have the resources to continue the development. US has overwhelmingly all the developers of Fedora. If Fedora wins over all other linux based distros (and at this time it could be easily do in a near future), developers in other countries will move on into other projects (or move to the US). If the US, once Fedora is so clear dominant and Debian and Arch ceased to exists down the road, the US will find it compelling to close source Fedora and leave the rest of the world with a forked version but unable to develop for the time being since there is no Linux experts around left. This is not far fetched, this is what happens with Android and Firefox. If Firefox closes, the dudes in librewolf will survive for a few months (I’m in Librewolf), that is it; none of them are capable of keeping developing Gecko (the engine of Firefox). Imagine that Google close sources Android, no one in the world (besides Huawei) could keep develop it competitively for at least a decade!

I am afraid we are taking different things here… I look in a long perspective view, you in a inmediate future, where, as you said, no big changes if a dominant FOSS project goes hostile. The lack of expertise, culture makes it really hard in fact. Look at this… SWIFT (an interbanking payment system) , when US, in spite being European, dominates it completely, Russia and China has been for half a decade create and alternative… it is not a mayor technically difficult platform to replicate, but it is proven very hard… relying on it for decades had left every country at its merci and now that most of the world wants an alternative still could not come up with a viable alternative. Remember also when France/EU wanted to create a payment system with Iran… well, never came to fruition. Haven relying in the US for decades left Europe powerless for these innovations. The same could happen with Fedora if we start adopting it in mass.

So true eldavi! The “Russian kernel maintainers” event was a big red flag for me. I know Linux had no choice to expel them due to the law, but the fact that Linus Torvalds did not thank them for the job done (if he kept them till then , Torvalds clearly has see their contributions as beneficial), and Torvalds did not try to reassure the audience that hardly any code is posted unsupervised in a open source… that was the main scandal for me, far more than the ban. I had known that Torvalds was a rude person, many maintainers are and I am ok with that, but that event showed me that not only easily folds to government requests, but that also he believes it is ok to do these things against people you don’t like…

In his own words; “please use whatever mush you call brains. I’m Finnish”. I don’t think he referred to the Finland that thrived the most in its history during the period of maintaining a strong military culture yet NEUTRAL (1948-2023) and away from NATO, but he deeply meant the Finland that sided with Germany in the early 40s in order to stick-it to Moscow. Would he stop at firing developers or would be willing to do more for the cause? I bet many wonder.