Skip Navigation
when you upgrade an OS, do you clean install or upgrade?
  • Well, I also use a rolling release distro, my disk died last week so I had to reinstall, so technically FULL hardware update might require a reinstall (safer than copying the root folder from one disk to another since the old one was bad), but yeah, before that I've replaced almost every piece of that laptop without a reinstall, even switched from Nvidia to AMD.

  • A new AMD vs Nvidia decision?
  • AMD no doubt. Back in 2017 AMD had recently open sourced their drivers I was in the market for a GPU, but you know the saying "fool me once shame on you", AMD used to SUCK on Linux, people always seem to forget about it, so I chose an Nvidia. I don't regret my choice, but over the years AMD proved that it had really changed, so my new GPU now is an AMD, and the experience is just so much better.

    Today it might be a turning point, maybe Nvidia will change, maybe they'll change their mind and fuck It up, they've done it in the past, so I wouldn't buy an Nvidia just in case they do the right thing for once, AMD is already doing the right thing for years. Also if you go with Nvidia forget about Wayland, and every day more and more distros are going Wayland only, so if you go Nvidia you might find yourself holding a very expensive paperweight in a few years.

  • A new AMD vs Nvidia decision?
  • An Nvidia 3070 costs 420 and benchmarks at 22,403 (benchmark point per dollar 53.34) An AMD 6800 costs 360 and benchmarks at 22,309 (benchmark point per dollar 61.97)

    So you get a 0.4% drop in performance for a 14.3% drop in price. That is significantly more performance per dollar.

    Or if you go with a 3070ti ($500 23,661 -> 47.32) vs a 7800 XT ($500 23,998 -> 47.97) you get a 1.4% performance increase for free (not really that significant I know, but still it's free performance)

    All of the numbers were taken from

  • As a capable but lazy user, how much would switching to Arch frustrate me?
  • Are you versed in Linux though? If not I think going with Mint or another beginner friendly distro would be better.

    That being said, if you are comfortable enough around Linux Arch is great, and the meme about being difficult probably stems from people who have no idea what they're doing trying to install it. The installation is the most difficult party if you can spin up a VM and successfully install and run it there you're good to go.

    On the long run though I prefer Arch exactly because I'm lazy. Yes, installing it is a bit tedious, but if you know what you're doing it's 30 min of tedious stuff, then you get access to the lazy motherload, i.e. the Arch User Repository (the AUR essentially contains 99% of every software you might want to install but is not on the official repositories, so no looking for PPAs or downloading installers from random websites ever again), plus it's a rolling release distro, so no more reinstallations or version upgrades that need lots of attention.

    Overall I use Arch because I'm lazy, but you need to be comfortable around Linux for you to be able to be Lazy using Arch.

  • How the heck am I supposed to get into Linux?
  • What do you mean the steps on mint site? Iirc Mint doesn't have a wiki or anything of the sort, were you maybe reading answers from users in a forum?

    Installing wine should be something like sudo apt install wine, if you're doing anything more complicated than that you're likely overcomplicating things and will cause issues on yourself

    You did mention installing via the software store, do you remember what the error was? Wine can be a bit finicky with the version and what you're trying to run in it.

    As for reaper I have no idea, never used it.

  • How the heck am I supposed to get into Linux?
    • Trust me bro Linux is super easy to learn, also here's 14 different specific terms you'll have to Google, but even then you'll barely understand them

    Linux is easy, but it's also different, I think a good comparison in several aspects is Android, would you say that Android is hard? But does ANY of your Windows knowledge applies to it?. Linux is the same thing, it's not hard, but most of us come from a Windows background so we need to unlearn certain things and learn new ones. Linux does not try to be Windows, and as such it has several key differences that if you come with an inflexible Windows mentality are going to be self-imposed problems. If you go with an open mind, and just try to poke around there's 90% chance that everything you need will be easily doable, I've put Linux on several of my elder relatives computers and they never had an issue, the problems start with people who are knowledgeable on Windows and think that this means they're knowledgeable on Linux, a great example is watching Linus from LTT destroy his graphical interface because he's trying to do something and the system tells him "THIS WILL BREAK STUFF, if you're sure you know what you are doing type: Yes, I know what I'm doing", and he goes "off, of course I know what I'm doing", when in fact he didn't.

    And that's what usually happens, people who are knowledgeable in Windows are very stubborn in the way things should be done, they expect certain things from the system and get frustrated when things don't work the way they expect, so the majority of the Linux community tries to educate newcomers, sometimes to a fault, by providing lots more of information than what the person actually needs, in the hopes that they will not only be able to deal with their problem but also learn how to deal with similar problems in the future.

    • Everything will work out of the box, but also you can't use that thing with that other thing without configuring that other thing first but that'll break that thing which needed that thing [...]

    Those things are not as mutually exclusive as they sound. Almost everything should work out of the box, but when you start to try to do specific things you might get to specific errors.

    I'm slightly exaggerating and I may get downvoted but I needed to vent. It honestly sometimes seems like Linux diehards are intentionally hiding some of its major pitfalls in order to "convert" more people to their side.

    Nah, you're good, we know how the community is, at the end of the day we're just a bunch of nerds that enjoy tinkering with their system to get it exactly the way we like, and every such specialized community will have the same issues, take for example PCMR or other PC Hardware communities, they make a big fuzz about RGB controllers and glass panels, or even technically sounding stuff such as the RAM speed or the NVMe speed vs regular SSD, but do those things REALLY matter for the average user? Or is it more that you're in such a specialized circle that they worry about such minuses because everyone there already knows the big important stuff?.

    The Linux community is the same, plus also you get the equivalent of people fighting over which color is prettier. And some people, especially those that are not beginners but haven't reached the "it's all the same" mentality tend to have very strong opinions on Distributions, Graphical interfaces, video card drivers, etc.

    I know windows sucks and that's why I want to switch, but at least when you have a windows question there's a concrete answer, not a bunch of nerds yelling out incoherent technobabble-sounding answers that all contradict each other.

    Is it though? Try asking which windows version you should install or which GPU, you'll get tons of different answers because at the end of the day you're asking for an opinion. I don't know which questions have you asked, but it's very hard to ask a question that's not an opinion on Linux because the system is so customizable that everyone's is slightly different. Os that a good or a bad thing? It depends who you ask, it creates a lot of heterogeneity which is bad for answering questions, but it also means that almost assuredly there's something out there that fits exactly what you would like to have.

    And for fucks sake please type the whole words when speaking to beginners. How am I supposed to know what a DE, a VM, a CLI, a WM, PM, or all that other stuff is?

    DE: Desktop Environment, in Linux you can customize the frontend, so a DE is essentially changing how the system looks and navigates graphically without affecting how it works under the hood. DEs are a set of programs meant to be used together to provide a cohesive experience. You can have several DEs installed, some examples of DEs include GNOME, Plasma (KDE), XFCE, Cinnamon, etc

    VM: Virtual Machine, usually the community recommend people who are unsure on trying Linux to install a VM software on Windows and try Linux there so they can do it without any risks.

    CLI: Command Line Interface, i.e. the terminal, or more specifically programs that are meant to be run in the terminal as opposed as having a Graphical User Interface (GUI).

    WM: Window Manager, one part of the DE is what's used to draw windows, some people use custom WM without using a full DE built for it, or they might use some parts of one and some parts of the other. For example I use a WM which doesn't provide any other programs, so if I want a program to browse files I need to install one from a different DE, for example I use Dolphin (which is the one used on Plasma) but I use Firefox as my browser (which is the one used in GNOME), so I custom built my DE from bits an pieces of others, and the WM I choose is called i3, I like it because it's tiling, meaning that it automatically controls the windows I open so they're all visible, also I like it because it's very keyboard driven (and I had muscle issues with long use of mouses) and because the configuration is in plain text so it's easy to migrate.

    PM: no idea

    Linux is the "least welcoming, yet most aggressively butthurt that no one is joining it" community I've seen in a while.

    With that I disagree, I think the community is very welcoming, but they're also very opinionated. I'm not saying we're lacking in assholes, but as a general I don't think that's what happens.

    If you have any more questions don't hesitate to ask.

    PS: Jesus Christ, what a massive wall of text

  • How the heck am I supposed to get into Linux?
  • (too long of an answer, had to split it up, second part will be a reply to this)

    Hahahaha man, you are so right you don't even know how much, the community is great but also very passionate and opinionated. I'll try to be as beginner friendly as possible, if I mention something you don't understand don't hesitate to ask.

    • It doesn't matter what distro you use, but also you absolutely should not use that one!! Use that one it's much better trust me!

    For someone who's been in Linux for decades like myself, it doesn't matter what distro I use, they're all essentially the same under the hood, however when you're first starting it ABSOLUTELY matters. If you're looking for. Distro recommendation, I'll suggest Mint, but do I use Mint? No. Why do I recommend it then? Because Mint is very user friendly, it will auto setup a lot of stuff for you, and will be a relatively easy experience. Why don't I use Mint then? Because being user friendly is not something I care about, instead I care about my system being more updated (even if that means possible problems), I prefer my system being more barebones (even if that means I have to do a lot of the legwork myself), but for a beginner those things won't matter as much, having a nice experience matters more. When we say distro doesn't matter, it means that under the hood they're all the same, once you're comfortable in one Linux you're comfortable in all of them, and there's nothing one distro can do or use that others can't, but the experience you get out of the box is completely different.

    • Gaming is good on Linux now, but also it's super shit and you should keep windows if you want to game

    Gaming is good, but also some games purposefully break compatibility. Mainly multiplayer games have anticheats that detect you're running on Linux and close the game, but also some single player games have DRM that does the same. Does this happen on every multiplayer game? Nope, but since we don't know what you're playing it's a safe bet to tell you to keep Windows just in case. If you want to know specifics check protondb it lists all games on steam and people report how it works on Linux so you can make an assessment for yourself if you want to keep Windows or not. But my personal recommendation is to keep it just in case, it's easier to keep it and not need it than need it and not have it, eventually you might realize you haven't booted windows in a year and wipe it out (that's what happened to me many years ago)

    • Sure you can use Nvidia cards, but also no you can't because nothing will work with them

    Let me preface this by saying, for the past 11 years (up until last week) I've used Nvidia on Linux exclusively, and never had any issues. The majority of people that I see having issues with Nvidia tried to install the drivers manually instead of using their distribution package manager, this is a common error for beginners, and leads to lots of headaches.

    Also some background: Linux is open source, Nvidia refuses to open source their drivers and in fact actively harms open source driver performance. This causes some conflict, and it doesn't help that Nvidia's drivers don't support lots of things they need to in order to be used fully on Linux.

    With that in mind, Nvidia open source drivers (which are the default on some distros) are SLOW (not because of the drivers fault, but because nvidias literally check for the driver and run slower on them), so gaming on them is not feasible. On the other hand proprietary drivers work, you get very good performance, but they only support an old technology stack. See, there's a program on Linux called X11, this program essentially is used to draw EVERYTHING, but it's old as fuck, and being so old it has lots of issues (nothing you should care about, but technically there are issues there), so there's been a push for YEARS trying to replace it with a more modern alternative called Wayland, and recently some distros have made the jump and use Wayland as default. The problem is that Nvidia's proprietary drivers don't support Wayland, and so if you have an Nvidia card those distributions don't fully work and you get lots of weird errors (Mint still uses X11, that's part of the reason why I recommend it)

    • Just dual boot if you're not sure, but also no don't dual boot because windows will erase your shit if you do

    Just dual boot if you want to, this comes from an old problem where Windows would erase the Linux boot drive when it updated. Afaik this doesn't happen anymore because most systems use UEFI to boot. Even if it did it's an easy fix, nothing of actual value gets deleted, it's just the program that allows you to choose windows or Linux, so all you need to do is boot a Linux USB drive and reinstall that program (which might be difficult for someone just starting, which is why when this used to happen to me back in 2004 I would just reinstall Linux since there are ways to do that without losing your data if you prepared ahead).

  • Mint is up and running!
  • Quick test you can run to confirm this is lspci | grep nvidia and lspci | grep nouveau one of them will display something and the other nothing (hopefully), nvidia is the name of the properietary driver, nouveau is the open source one.

  • Mint is up and running!
  • Yeah, there might be an nvidia-prime package or something, either that or the command in mint must be different. Quick Google didn't helped me and it's after 1AM for me so my brain is not helping either, hopefully someone else can help you, if not tomorrow I'll be back.

    But everything looks correct, Nvidia settings only works if the Nvidia driver is installed, now all you need is to figure out how to tell Mint to run things with the Nvidia GPU and you should be good to go.

  • Mint is up and running!
  • From our other reply you should be fine, this is a prime laptop so it will use the CPU for everything unless you specify different z that's by intent to preserve power since Nvidia cards consume lots of it and otherwise your battery would last an hour or so, windows does the same, the difference is that Windows tries to guess which apps need it and on Linux you have to be specific about it.

  • Mint is up and running!
  • Ok, prime laptop, run the following then: prime-run glxinfo | grep -i vendor if prime-run doesn't work there are others like optimun, I'll check which one is the correct for mint and reply back.

  • Mint is up and running!
  • I think a better analogy is "remember when you had an iso that you had to burn onto a DVD to be able to boot from it? Or to be able to have the CD player recognize it instead of just writing the songs into it?, sort of the same thing".

    What you downloaded is a binary image, i.e. the sequence of 0 and 1 needed for a computer to boot into Linux, now you need to feed that sequence directly to the computer, but the computer only knows how to read it from a thumb drive directly, not from a file inside the thumb drive, so you need to write that sequence bit by bit in order on the thumb drive. Back in the day we used Nero for dvds, Rufus does the same but to a thumb drive.

    Fun fact in Linux you can use dd which unlike what most people say doesn't stand for Disk Destroyer (although certainly lots of disks were destroyed by it), which is an application that does binary writes. Hell, in Linux you can actually do cat image.iso > /dev/sdb and that should work, that is essentially print the output of the file image.iso and write it into /dev/sdb which should be the second disk plugged to your system (first one being /dev/sda).

    Cool, I started using Linux back in 04, but I think not that much changed, I think it's mostly people who change the way they look at Linux, outside of gaming, for day to day use, Linux was very usable even back then.

  • Mint is up and running!
  • No you don't, they're mutually exclusive, there are a couple of ways to check which one you're running, from lsmod to check which module is loaded on the kernel to my favorite: glxinfo | grep -i vendor

    First of all don't run random commands from the internet without understanding them. Now to what that command does, glxinfo prints a lot of output about what's being used to render OpenGL, you might need to install mesa-demos, mesa-tools or something else if glxinfo is not installed by default. Then the pipe, i.e. the vertical bar | says to grab the output from the left command and feed it to the right command. grep is used to filter an input, and the -i flag tells it to do it without being case sensitive, i.e. Insensitive. Then vendor is the text you're using as a filter. Long story short that command shows information about the vendor used to render OpenGL.

    If it says Nvidia you're using the proprietary driver (which you should use from your other comment). If it says Mesa you're using the open source drivers (which should be "fine" but will have very bad gaming performance)

  • Does anyone really need a 1,000 Hz gaming display?
  • The title doesn't ask if it's useful, it asks if it's required, considering that no one NEEDS a display to begin with, a 1000Hz display by definition cannot be NEEDED.

    I will likely get one eventually, just like I have a 165Hz display now, but do I NEED it? Absolutely no.

  • InitialsDiceBear„Initials” ( by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (
    Posts 0
    Comments 671