Linux inquiries
Linux inquiries
People have already commented, but I think it wasn't mentioned before that microcode updates aren't saved in the BIOS or settings—meaning they're temporary. They must be applied to the CPU during each startup. It seems some boards might upload microcode directly, though most don't. This likely happens because microcode isn't tightly linked with the BIOS, so changing it would require additional updates. It makes more sense for the operating system to manage this. I think Ubuntu remains a solid option for most users who need a reliable desktop environment. Any current desktop should support dual monitors well. Some lightweight ones might lack features, so consider Gnome or KDE Plasma. I’m using Arch Linux now, but if you prefer not to dive into the command line, search for Arch Wiki guides. My preferred choice is Plasma (KDE), though it can be frustrating. It launches quickly even on a MacBook Pro from mid-2009 with an SSD. Regarding KDE: What version were you using before? I personally favored KDE 3—the best experience I’ve had, though some say it’s declined since KDE 2. But back then, Linux was still new. In any case, KDE has evolved a lot.
I hate the usual Ubuntu stuff. It has a bunch of oddities that don’t quite fit. Go for Mint 18.3 MATE instead—it runs smoothly.
I'm really into Linux Mint. Fedora works well too. My goal is to use it as my main operating system. Witcher 3 is what's stopping me from going all in on Windows 10 on my gaming rig, at least right now.
I don't like Linux Mint. I messed up the installation with a quick 'apt-get autoremove'. Usually I prefer keeping as much upstream as possible. The further down the road you go, the more likely it is that package repositories become mixed up, increasing the chances of issues. Right now I'm using Fedora on my desktop and Arch on my laptop. If you're just starting with Linux, Fedora might be a better choice.
I checked Fedora and wasn't sure about Steam support. However, I heard it offers a beta experience. They don’t release long-term support like Ubuntu does. Still, if it isn’t the case, I’d be open to trying it. What I need is an operating system that doesn’t require reinstalling every few months or a year due to frequent updates—something stable for me. Right now, Windows 10 does that.
Fedora lacks long-term support releases similar to Ubuntu. It seems quite reliable. (I haven't encountered any issues with it.) In fact, I've faced more trouble with outdated packages in my Ubuntu LTS setups than with 'broken because too new' updates on both my Fedora and Arch installations. For everyday desktop tasks, updates tend to be quite stable, though they can become outdated quickly. I might even say my Fedora version feels more consistent than my Ubuntu LTS releases. Usually, everything runs with the latest versions, whereas in Ubuntu LTS some packages might require newer versions, but the system doesn't update dependencies automatically.
Mint primarily functions as a collaborative effort rooted in Ubuntu LTS. Fedora receives backing from a billion-dollar company and is crafted by its skilled developers together with community contributors. Consequently, Fedora receives regular updates and improvements, while outdated versions older than a year are typically no longer maintained. It seems the lack of support for such old releases isn’t a concern when upgrading Linux to newer versions is straightforward and backing up files only involves copying the home directory.
The patch update issue stems from Intel's code, leading to complications. Certain Linux distributions experienced additional problems as a result.