I'd go the other direction and choose Debian. It's what Ubuntu is based on, and actually lives up to the spirit of FOSS.
The only problem that I have with Debian is that packages are several versions behind what would be considered current. If I had to use it, i would use sid, despite the dreaded "unstable" label.
I'm pretty sure sid also has package freezes for when it moves up to testing. In general Debian's purpose is as a stable distro and it might be better to use a distro that focuses on rolling release for bleeding edge packages.
Out of the box I would say Debian needs a fair amount of work after installation before it is an easy to use desktop OS.
I agree, but OP wants GNOME 44, which is not available yet in Debian, except through experimental.
I'd say Linux Mint or Pop OS.
Otherwise, as other comments say, you can try Debian.
Pop or Mint are fantastic. They are my go to.
Don't forget elementary!
I'm bearish on Elementary. Their recent-ish drama where the founders split up doesn't seem good for long-term stability:
Yikes. Was this ever resolved? That was from march last year.
The founders don't like each other on a personal level, and I haven't heard about any updates since then, so until there's new life breathed onto the project somehow, I'm assuming that it's on the back burner at best.
Oh I didn't know this was happening, sorry to hear that :-/. (I had elementary back in 2016/17)
what's your reasoning behind ubuntu? Ease of use and maintenance? I'd argue rolling release distros that don't require ppa's or snaps are easier to maintain. Arch has been amazing in my experience. If the DIY aspect of it is too much for you to handle (which really is only user required at install and the install guide is actually great and only required you to read carefully to succeed) you can use something like endeavourOS that removes the arch install process and is still pretty close to arch. I've personally found arch significantly easier and less annoying to maintain than ubuntu and even debian that I run on my servers.
Linux Mint is great.
Honestly. Debian. It's just so solid and works so well.
LMDE it's the best of both worlds, or openSUSE if you're outside the Debian/Ubuntu world.
Debian is a good choice *if* you're going to use Flatpaks. If not, it's a bad idea IMO.
Don't think about today situation with the new version. Think about two years from now. Without Flatpaks, you'll have a lot of software problems.
But overall I agree, Debian is a good choice too.
E: formatting
Without Flatpaks, you’ll have a lot of software problems.
How is that?
Probably he means that Debian stable is outdated by definition (e.g., Debian 12 it just released to stable, and has Gnome 43 instead of 44), and to stay on top of new versions you would eventually rely on flatpak.
However this is a false problem, because if you want a updated version, you just change your update channel from 'stable' to 'testing' in the sources.list conf file etc voilà you have a rolling release with fresh stuff.
I'm not talking about what comes with the distro itself.
I think that to answer that, we would need to know what about Mint, Pop_OS, Vanilla OS, and Nobara you didn't like.
Have you tried Arch?
You should try Arch.
It will be exactly what you make it.
It has great documentation and walkthroughs.
It's got a cool name.
You get to say you run Arch.
Join us... cthulu ftaghn
Dear god, please do not recommend arch to people without telling them what to expect...
OP: With Arch, expect to spend a couple hours setting it up before seeing a GUI, and be ready for periodic system-breaking updates which have to be resolved.
What didn't you like about plain Ubuntu?
I need to upgrade my ubuntu 18.04 desktop to something now, as it is out of support.
Pop looked interesting, but I am definitely looking for recommendations. I would prefer to stay in the debian/ubuntu type dostro, as that is what I am most familiar with, and can't be bothered re learning!
I've been running pop for a few years and pretty happy with it. Also, if you're interested, their window manager is a great way to get into tiling without having to fully commit.
I second pop. Nvidia drivers work out of the box. Flatpaks are treated like first class citizens. I hopped around a lot way back (Ubuntu, all its official flavours, mint, debian, elementary, even crunchbang) but landed on pop and haven't moved yet.
I really looking to get a pre- configured DE. Looks like I will be giving it a go.
Ta
Why did nobody mention Xubuntu?
It doesn't have gnome 44
What didn’t you like?
Give Kubuntu a try. It is my favorite so far. It uses the plasma desktop though.
Nobara is Fedora based afaik. I guess you didn't like the Desktop Environment (the look and feel, user interface), not the OS in it's functionality, since all of the distro based work basically the same under the hood.
So: I suggest you to try different DEs, not different OSs. You could try Gnome, KDE, XFCE, i3, there are a lot.
If you still want to stick with distro hopping, then i suggest you these good-looking distros, Ubuntu based:
ZorinOS: looks and feels very similar to windowz
DeepinOS: Very good looking DE
ElementaryOS: kinda looks like MacOS, lacks some software from its store tho
Bonus - Linux Mint Debian Edition (LMDE)
I mean, if you don't like Ubuntu much and you can also use the terminal, maybe try out Debian? Packages are a little dated but if you are willing to live with it, it's a great experience. I have some unstable repos added to my install for newer packages, and its been a good experience with 0 issues so far. I mainly use the GUI and its also been easy to use and super stable, although I suppose Pop and Mint would still be easier.
It's not exactly Ubuntu based, but its worth a shot.
Ubuntu is Debian based... I think you can still call it that. So if you don't like Ubuntu, try Debian. Its more stable/reliable.
Base Debian is the way
Not Ubuntu-based, but I saw a friend who's mainly a Mac user comment well about Endless OS, which is Debian-based (so Ubuntu's cousin). Maybe worth checking out?
KDE Neon is great for me.
FerenOS is an Ubuntu based distro, kind of like a KDE Ubuntu Linux Mint. It's having a new release next month.
There are a few good Ubuntu-based distros that I can recommend, but more information about what you're looking for would be helpful.
Why didn't you like vanilla Ubuntu? Was there anything you liked about it? Is there a specific reason you're set on Ubuntu-based?
Truth be told, the "good-est" one will be the one you like best....
If you want others' random opinions try review sites like those provided below:
I tried vanilla but didnt like it
Why?
Why does it have to be an Ubuntu derivate?
Just use Arch.
The funny thing is I'm actually using arch right now
For easy setup and a choice between Plasma and Gnome, I'm partial to Manjaro. Its pretty lightweight pleasant to use, only change from Ubuntu is that it doesn't use the apt package manager, but its an easy switch.
I'd try the search function of distrowatch and search based Ubuntu-base. IMO if you want gnome 44 you should stick with Ubuntu vanilla. But cinnamon Mint is better imo.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0