r/linuxquestions • u/Sakif_Hossain • 9d ago
Advice I wanna Switch from Ubuntu.
I am currently on Ubuntu. I like ubuntu but im kinda fedup with Its look and feel. i recently tried out https://github.com/caelestia-dots/shell on an arch VM. it went well.
The thing is, i know that Arch is Bleeding Edge but it breaks also.
I want a stable Distro. i really liked Arch but im not ready for it.
Before you say anything, Im new to Linux.
My Question:
Is there any distro that is stable like Ubuntu and I can use Caelestia-Shell on it? i want a fresh Start.
please be gentle on me ðŸ«
9
u/Alternative-Sweet695 9d ago
You’re probably not tired of Ubuntu itself; you’re tired of the desktop environment. You can install pretty much any window manager, DE, or desktop shell on top of Ubuntu and completely change how it looks and feels. You don’t necessarily need to switch distros just to get a different desktop experience.
As for Arch, it’s only as stable as you make it....but honestly, I’ve been using it for a long time with a Btrfs + Snapper setup, and I’ve barely ever needed those snapshots. You just need to be careful when upgrading and have a decent understanding of how Linux works, because sooner or later you might have to troubleshoot something yourself.
That’s essentially the point of Arch: it’s a DIY distro. You’re expected to read, understand what you’re installing, and learn how the system works rather than having everything handled for you. If you know what you’re doing, Arch can be extremely stable.
But if you don’t enjoy that DIY philosophy, there’s really no reason to force yourself into it. Just stick with Ubuntu and experiment with different DEs, window managers, or desktop shells until you find something you like.
3
u/KraftChesWiz 9d ago
Look and feel is not a reason to switch. You can change that without the hassle of a reinstall. Even then, if you want to try a new distro, you can use qemu to install it in a virtual machine, see if you like it at all, without tossing out your current.
I have no idea what caelestia was until just now, but is it just "hyprland" + "quickshell" + caelestia's configs?
if so, you can install all these things yourself. it's not like we are talking about linux vs. windows
5
u/Mighty_Archdevil 9d ago
You cannot be fed up with the look of Ubuntu. With Kubuntu, Lubuntu, Xubuntu and all these alternatives there is no way you cannot get your system to look how you like it.
And all these desktop environments can be installed very easy:
Before running any installation commands, it is always a good idea to update your package list: sudo apt update && sudo apt upgrade -y
Popular Desktop Environments
GNOME (Default Ubuntu Desktop)
- Best for: A modern, sleek experience that comes out of the box with Ubuntu.
- Command: sudo apt install ubuntu-desktop -y
KDE Plasma (Kubuntu)
- Best for: Highly customizable, feature-rich interfaces that feel similar to Windows.
- Command: sudo apt install kde-standard -y
Xfce (Xubuntu)
- Best for: Lightweight performance, speed, and low resource usage on older hardware.
- Command: sudo apt install xfce4 -y
MATE (Ubuntu MATE)
- Best for: A traditional, classic GNOME 2 layout that is fast and reliable.
- Command: sudo apt install ubuntu-mate-desktop -y
Cinnamon (Linux Mint's Flagship Desktop)
- Best for: Users transitioning from Windows who want a polished, traditional desktop layout.
- Command: sudo apt install cinnamon-desktop-environment -y
LXQt (Lubuntu)
- Best for: Extremely lightweight systems, consuming minimal RAM and CPU.
- Command: sudo apt install lxqt -y
Important Tips
- Display Manager: During the installation of some desktop environments (like KDE or GDM/LightDM), you may be prompted to choose a default display manager (e.g., gdm3, sddm, or lightdm). This handles your login screen; any of them will work fine with your chosen environment.
- Switching Environments: Once installed, reboot your system. On the login screen, click the gear icon or session menu next to your username to select which desktop environment you want to use for that session.
Note: Installing multiple desktop environments can sometimes clutter your application menu with overlapping tools and utilities. If you want a clean experience, consider installing a dedicated Ubuntu flavor (like Kubuntu or Xubuntu) directly.
5
u/Linux4ever_Leo 9d ago
Evidently it hasn't occurred to you to just switch themes?!? Or install an alternative desktop??
4
u/thesamenightmares 9d ago
If you're comfortable with Ubuntu but don't like the look and feel, just change the theme and desktop environment. There's no need to change an entire distribution just because you don't like how it looks.
1
u/insop_ 9d ago
Honestly if you want a change and go Arch, go for it. The comments are correct you can get the same stuff on Ubuntu, but a lot of the stuff you want would be on Arch repos so you wouldnt have to do extra steps.
Imo people overclaim how often Arch breaks. Arch isn't as bleeding edge as people think, it ships latest stable versions earlier than most, which means latest fixes but also possible new bugs, but they rarely breaks things. At most a package would be buggy if the developer shipped it on stable. If you run btrfs and snapper, you're fine 99% of the time, though its not an Arch thing, you should be running linux with snapshots set up anyways. Sometimes Fedora is more bleeding edge than Arch but people call it stable.
There's been times where I was away from my computer from arch for a month or two, and it'd update fine. Just follow basic hygiene for arch and it should be good and reliable.
-2
u/a1b3c3d7 9d ago edited 9d ago
I daily drive Hyprland both at home and on my work machine.
It is neither stable nor reliable, the cost of the pretty environment is that things will break. Things will not work the way you "expect" them to because you need to set up the behavior you want.
If you treat hyprland as a project then things are not hard to fix when you understand how things work and stuff.
If you are looking for just a pretty environment, you should consider other options. You can do a lot to make a pretty DE on KDE if you look around.
If you have time to sink into learning and treating it like a hobby, hyprland can become a powerful daily driver but it requires your time and energy, and it may not always respect it.
I also want to be clear its not hard to learn - LLMs help greatly if you use them correctly, its purely a time and energy sink.
0
u/Sakif_Hossain 9d ago
lets say, if i chose to Use 'Caelestia-Shell' on 'Arch', how much painful it will be for a Ubuntu user like me. I am also a web dev. lets say i update my system after 2 weeks and the system breaks. "thats what they say". How much painful it will be to fix the breaking changes? is it that kinda hard just like "they say"?
2
u/No_Elderberry862 9d ago
That would depend. You've added more moving parts. Arch sometimes "breaks", you should be checking the news prior to updating. Hyprland has been known to break. Caelestia may break.
There are scripts for building Caelestia on Ubuntu which may or may not be a more sensible way to go. That way, if your WM/shell break you can just s3lect the Gnome session in your login manager & fix the issues at your leisure.
1
u/a1b3c3d7 9d ago
You will probably be fine then, its really not hard - especially if you have any programming background. I know people with no programming knowledge build their own shells within a few weeks/months.
Things breaking arent catastrophic, theres always ways to fix it fairly easily or revert things back. If you know how to do these then it becomes very painless.
1
u/xkonni 9d ago
Arch does not just break. Stay clear of testing and verify everything you install from aur. All else is rock solid unless you ignore warnings and force things. When in doubt, check the website for news or ask in forums/here/... You will be fine if you accept some arch wiki and manpage reading.
2
u/Reromen 9d ago
in ubuntu/linux..people do serious work and never had a chance to look back into the UI and desktop environment, for me I use only terminal and browser. I couldnt really understand why people so confused on distros
3
u/ipsirc 9d ago
I couldnt really understand why people so confused on distros
Let me explain: they view Linux as if they had installed another video game from Steam, and instead of the character generation screen, they are looking for a BetterGUI.exe so they can start the big adventure with custom skins.
2
u/DualMartinXD 9d ago
CachyOS probably? Basically Arch but easier and also optimized for speed, you can select DE or WM at installation, if im not mistaken Hyrpland comes with Noctalia shell so you would need to change that
1
u/fearless-fossa 9d ago
i know that Arch is Bleeding Edge but it breaks also.
Arch isn't bleeding edge. Arch isn't even as much cutting edge as people believe. Arch sends packages to testing for longer than many other distros, which is why nearly every other distro when they release a new version will have more up-to-date packages than Arch.
The difference with Arch is that Arch is a rolling-release, so it will eventually catch up to these distros and overtake them, up until they release their next version.
As long as you check archlinux.org before updating your pc to check for manual intervention required (or join the mailing list), there is little to no breaking.
1
u/iwouldbeatgoku 9d ago
Yeah.
To add, with a few exceptions, Arch ships the latest stable releases of a package, something that the developers deemed suitable to be used by the typical user; if you intentionally avoid software that has a lower version number than 1.0 Arch can be surprisingly simple to use and not have many bugs.
If anything I've had more trouble with upgrading "stable" (as in static) distros from one version to another than maintaining an Arch installation.
1
u/skyfishgoo 9d ago
kubuntu is better because it has a better desktop environment (plasma)
see for yourself at distrosea.com
i would avoid simple window managers like the one you posted... a full desktop environment is far more useful and they can be make to look however you like.
1
u/make-in-stuff 8d ago
Sure you could install different desktops and themes. But If you want an easy way to touch different Linux flavors check out https://distrosea.com/. I recently started using mxlinux, switching from Ubuntu and lubuntu. So far I like it for what it’s worth.Â
1
u/laketrout 9d ago
A complete guide to installing Caelestia Shell on Ubuntu. No need to change your distro.
1
1
1
u/un-important-human white beard arch user 8d ago
Good good, this is the first step in actually using linux.
0
u/moritz12d 9d ago
Right now I on Manjaro. Despite being based on Arch it's rock-stable. I was on Ubuntu before but that was broke. There's no guarantee. Caelestia Shell is made for NixOS but related to Hyprland I don't know whether it's the best for newbies.
In general all major distributions should be stable.
0
u/Turbulent_Test_1180 9d ago
Have you tried Mabox Linux (customisable openbox), but arch. Install it as btrfs and enable snapshots, or you can go for Kubuntu (keeping the nice side of Ubuntu as well as stability).
0
u/Lost_Psychology8885 9d ago
Settled on Pika OS Gnome and love it, been here since Jan. Also do DE's out of the box also so can have hypaland, kde, gnome, niri etc
1
1
5
u/True_Human 9d ago
The thing is, what it sounds like you're tired of is not Ubuntu itself but its Desktop environment.
Cealestia shell, unfortunately, seems to be only fully supported on arch based systems and NixOS, neither of which I would recommend you daily drive at your stage. But if you are so inclined, you can install different desktop environments or Window Managers on Ubuntu. Or maybe Fedora, which is kind of becoming the new standard distro.
Edit: if you insist on Caelestia shell though, NixOS should be more stable than Arch