Title is quite self-explanatory, reason I wonder is because every now and then I think to myself “maybe distro X is good, maybe I should try it at some point”, but then I think a bit more and realise it kind of doesn’t make a difference - the only thing I feel kinda matters is rolling vs non-rolling release patterns.
My guiding principles when choosing distro are that I run arch on my desktop because it’s what I’m used to (and AUR is nice to have), and Debian on servers because some people said it’s good and I the non-rolling release gives me peace of mind that I don’t have to update very often. But I could switch both of these out and I really don’t think it would make a difference at all.
Because despite all the people telling me I’m wrong, Kubuntu is still by far the best distro I’ve ever used. Rock solid, super fast, and continues to improve.
I always unable to upgrade ubuntu based distros. I always need to reinstall
The only reason my last machine didn’t get more than 10 years worth of in-place upgrades was because I decommissioned it as a desktop and turned it into a server, so I wiped it at that point.
For me its because something new broke the upgrade feature.
Its always something different and I am unsure if its a me issue. It rarely worked but sometimes it did.
As soon as you change something on your Ubuntu by a little or lot, the upgrade is not possible. I feel forced to use rolling release because of my behaviour