What Linux distro do you prefer and why?

[Cosmicgames]

I haven't been on PCPer in quite a while. Not sure why. Life. Whatever.

So which distro do y'all prefer?
Which have you found easiest to use? Which offers the most flexibility and hardware support?

I keep flip-flopping between Ubuntu and Mint (Cinnamon), but NetrunnerSE has me intrigued and am probably going to give it a go this weekend. I'm liking the added security it claims to offer.

[ColeBrodine]

I'm currently running Mint on my laptop and dual booting it with Windows 7 on my main gaming/workstation PC. I have a server and several "frontends" that run Mythbuntu (so basically Ubuntu).

I ran Ubuntu in the past, but just haven't cared much for the UI so I gave Mint a try. So far I really like it. It seems to work well with Steam. Mint also seemed to find all my hardware without any issues, but I'm not really using anything too "bleeding edge".

[Cosmicgames]

Same. I'm currently running Ubuntu because I was in a hurry to install an OS and it installs pretty effortlessly.

Mint "felt" better, but I've recently had issues with getting it to install cleanly.

[Activate: AMD]

I've always stuck with Ubuntu for all my Linux needs. I've used it for a few F@H rigs and the quick/easy setup did everything I needed to just get the systems up and running

[mmettin]

Ubuntu for me as well, folding as well

No drivers needing to be installed, everything worked natively.

Still don't like the Unity interface though

[grimmster]

Hate Ubuntu and all debian based builds! I prefer Fedora, but really use CentOS because I use Linux at work, not at home.

[Poci]

I really like ultimate edition but am running mint in vm cause it requires much less space on my ssd

Also liked the hax0r distros like black box I think its called but is also very difficult, its for the leet

[Captain_Stormy]

I use to be a big Ubuntu fan but for the past few years they have just been making lots of weird decisions I can't get on board with.

I've decided to bed down with openSUSE these days. I'm a big fan, everything is very stable and works without any fuss.

[Mnemonicman]

Arch Linux. It's not that hard to install provided you have the instructions handy if you forget some of the commands. I get the bare minimum software to do what I need it to do and usually the most bleeding edge software. Sometime a bit too bleeding edge as the AMD Catalyst drivers are slow to adopt newer kernels and Xorg. But it is stable and very flexible as to what it can do. I put Arch onto every PC I run linux on.

[Captain_Stormy]

Arch is nice. I ran it on one of my desktops for about 3 years. Took me a while to get everything set up the way I liked it but it was fairly nice once I did.

I'm just not a fan of the rolling release type of setup. I care a little more about stability and polish then I do about having the brand new version of software the day it comes out. I didn't have a ton of issues, but certainly more than I've had on the more traditional types of releases.

[MrNovi]

Knoppix. It does what I want and what I need.

[ZemaTalon]

I've been running XFCE in Salix 14 the past year and really liking it. It's basically Slackware slightly tweaked to smooth out some of the rough edges. It's very stable and configurable. Compile applications from source, a SlackBuild script, or just install them via Gslapt package manager. LMDE (Linux Mint Debian Edition) is also good, and what I used previously, though that one is a rolling release distro.

[JCNiest5]

Seems like Ubuntu get's the most usage. I'm learning to use it, too.

[MrNovi]

Ubuntu was fine thru 10.10 when it used Gnome 2, but it went downhill rapidly starting with 11.04 once the switch to the abombination known as Unity for a desktop and has gotten steadily worse ever since, especially with all of the Adware in the latest releases.

Xubuntu and Lubuntu are still fine though and if one is willing to take the time to uninstall Unity and replace it with Mate or Cinnamon Ubuntu can be made to be quite usable.

[notdrugged]

When I had the time to fool with Linux it was Arch Linux for many years. The problem with rolling release Linux, though as said by others, is that it breaks just a tad more frequently. I broke it many times (my fault) and fixed it relatively quickly. I also learned to always read developer notes before doing global upgrades. I quit Linux permenantly when it went to system.d That was it for me. Though I do admit documentation has gotten alot better for Linux, on a rolling release it's two steps backwards in that very critical point. Because most developers are volunteers, they sometimes cannot take the time to fully document functional workarounds. And frankly, the pure control that Arch Linux gave spoiled me. I would be running it today if it had adequate documentation. So I like the benefits of the rolling release, but I don't have the time or patience for the difficulty in administrating one. And I can't stand Ubuntu or any distro that puts unnecessary scripts or dependencies in an attempt to give people the Microsoft experience. Because it doesn't work right, and you have no control. Honestly, if I didn't have to work, I would use Linux still.