Linux Journey 2025

What are the main reasons people don't use Linux on the deskop? Perhaps, one is that people like me who are perfectly capable of using Linux desktops (and all the software), struggle to do so sometimes.

4K on Linux

For example, I got this new MSI 32" 4K 160Hz HDR monitor recently. It's a great value monitor that I hope to use for a long time. I've had a 34" 2560x1080 ultrawide, multiple 1080p monitors. I know that a single 1080p monitor isn't quite enough for me. For example, it's difficult to have two applications open on the same screen at the same time. I thought that an ultrawide would solve that. As soon as you want just one application open, it's ultra wide, which I feel is difficult to concentrate on, when the application is super stretched. So I tried a 16:9 4K monitor with my MacBook for work, and it's been very ideal for workflows. So, just swap MacOS for Linux and it'll be fine? I thought. MacOS and Windows have a fractional scaling feature. Because 4K at 200% scaling is basically pointless, it's just a bigger 1080p monitor. And 100% is a little too small for me. But something like 125-150% gives you the benefit of more usable space, with still some larger, higher detailed UI. After a lot of jumping back and forward, between various Linux distros and Windows, I finally found that fractional scaling is a bit broken a the moment. One major issue, is that with it enabled, games will run at some weird upscaled resolution. Also, for older version of Wayland, eg in Ubuntu 24.04, many applications look pixelated. I've read that the way that fractional scaling works, is it scales up the application to 200% then scales it back down again. Which seems ver inefficient, instead of some kind of native UI scaling in GTK, Qt, etc. I eventually learned that I can simply change the font scale in GNOME at least, and most likely other DEs. With GNOME Tweaks. This gives a almost the same solution to fractional scaling, with a few minor things like window buttons not being scaled up. Nothing too major. So, that problem is solved.

Immutable vs mutable

Immutable distros sound like a great idea. Prevent the user from breaking things with root access, by making the operating system packages locked while the OS is running. In reality, I somehow quickly found issues with it. For example, I wanted to use the Steam SDK in a game I was developing, and that required Steam to be installed as a system package, not a Flatpak. Which isn't well supported outside of Bazzite. Also, if you want to install system-level drivers like for DisplayLink and graphics tablets, this requires a underlying system modification. Which is a bit risky, and I recall it lead to some issues. For now, immutable OS's aren't for everyone.

Arch - AUR is a time bomb

I wanted Arch to be a logical distro to use. Why not, use the latest packages with a OS installed manually from the command line. It sounds ideal. But evenutally, you find yourself using things like yay package manager to install things outside of pacman. In my case, I tried installing Sunshine desktop streaming, which worked, but also broke the pakcage management system. So that put me off using Arch, the fear that if I ever use yay and AUR I might corrupt my package manager.

Fedora - Unsure, buggy?

I of course tried Fedora, which has a good reputation of being like Ubuntu but newer and still fairly stable, without snaps and Flatpak nbuilt in. But in my experience, it seemed to have some bugs, like I recall a lock screen bug, where you got stuck at the login screen, making it unable to log in without rebooting. Fedora might be okay now, but I am leaving it.

Other distros

I did try OpenSUSE Tumbleweed. A rather underrated distro that seemed to work great with rolling packages like Arch. What lead me to ditch it was Steam - it had some weird UI bugs that got quite annoying. I concluded that it must have been due to the lesser tested RPM package. But I found the issue also occured in an Ubuntu 24.04 system. The fix was to set Steam to the beta version. So OpenSUSE is likely a perfectly fine distro for me, I will just hold off for now. Others I notably liked were Linux Mint, ElementaryOS, and SolusOS.

Ubuntu LTS - The gateway distro

After a lot of distro hopping, and going back to Windows for a while in defeat, I finally returned to Ubuntu 24.04 LTS. Problem was, my new graphics card, the AMD RX 9060 XT wasn't supported by the kernel. A quick web search showed some Reddit users suggesting to try another distro because of "skill issue". Which is not a friendly attitude to have. Instead, I downloaded the amdgpu package from AMD's website, to enable hardware acceleration. And it simply works. I now get games at full speed. My philosophy going forward is, if Ubuntu LTS doesn't work, go back to Windows. If it does, give it some time at least before distro hopping again. I've worked in QA now, and I get this feeling with Ubuntu, that it works better than most other distros overall. It's a good fallback safety net. My guess is that Ubuntu 24.04 LTS is very commonly used in the wild, over other Linux desktop distros, you just hear a lot of noise from users from other distros.

Still not a fan of Windows 11

Windows 11 is basically a crusty old desktop OS with a new skin applied every few years. It's not keeping up with my needs, which is to have a built in Linux or Unix command line system. Sure, WSL exists. Firstly, you have to install it, which is a process. Then, performance with the Windows filesystem is quite bad. It just gives so much friction to doing something simple like sudo apt install nodejs and then creating a new project. You can get VSCode to integrate with WSL, and IntelliJ apps. It's just not fun to use. But then there are other issues. I am still a little paranoid? that Windows is sending semi personal data off to unknown sources. There is no evidence to suggest it's not doing that. Windows is a telemetry monster, sending data over the net quite frequently. And while my hardware can easily run Windows 11, with strict requirements, it's sending a lot of old hardware to landfill. Perfectly usable systems that can browse the web, play games, do productivity tasks. And you can use a modified Windows 11 USB, not everyone knows about that or how to do that, and it may not work forever. Really the biggest reason I prefer Linux is the superior developer experience. Macs are good too, but I argue Linux is better again, in my experience.

Is Linux on the desktop easy to recommend?

Short answer, not really. I think that you have to discover it on your own, most of the time. You have to have that determined, optimistic mindset of tinkering and testing it out, adapting to different apps, like no Adobe or MS Office. It's very developer friendly, and as a developer it's great. If you're not a software developer, your mileage may vary. For example if you're into PC gaming, the experience is still better on Windows, with app stores like Epic Games and BattleNet being natively supported, and not on Linux (possible with some tweaks). I don't mind missing out on a few games, or having to jump through a few hoops to get some others working. But I do mind having an inferior developer experience in Windows, plus all the other issues that Windows has (telemetry, landfill generation).