The distribution doesn't to too much, its mostly the desktop environment. I like the look of KDE Plasma the most. But usually I craft my own look after a while.
Linux
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.
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
- No misinformation
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
I like the look of KDE Plasma the most.
GNOME vs KDE gang fight has been summoned.
The look of GNOME isn't the problem of GNOME. ;-) I'm not a good citizen right now.
Absolutely. GNOME often looks better, but it just doesnt work. Basic things everywhere are removed or not added.
Well GNOME has issues but in terms of look it's 69420x better than KDE.
The thing I've learned in the many years of watching this fight is that the things Gnome people (of which I am one, though I have immense respect and appreciation for the KDE project) don't like about KDE tend to be the things KDE people like about KDE and vice versa.
These projects are almost diametrically opposite. GNOME tries to provide a very simple, solid but not very configurable desktop with good accessibility and stability while KDE tries to make a very configurable and powerful environment that can be customized to anyone's needs. I don't like KDE because it's unstable, way too powerful for my personal needs (their "simple by default; powerful when needed" concept doesn't really work) and I just don't like the UI. Though KDE's better performance is an objective advantage.
I tend to agree. I mean, the gnome workflow is more appealing to me (though I have since moved to a WM), but my dislike of KDE comes down to (a) too many options everywhere and (b) it looks too “sharp”. If KDE had an “I’m done fiddling” mode that hid most of the options and I found a softer theme, I’d probably like it fine.
Absolutely nothing I just said should take away from others’ preference for KDE. I’m glad we can like what we like.
Agreed. I think it's not about distros we should have pay attention, but desktop environments.
And about "most appealing" DE I think it's subjective. Surely KDE has the most flexible structure and may be exactly what you want, but Gnome is also appealing for some people (myself included).
Again, there is no right or wrong, just personal preferences
I took it as a question of which distro looks nicest out of the box (like, which distro manager has made real effort to make something particularly nice looking).
I don't think it's the distros job to look visually appealing. That's the job of the desktop environment. Seriously I wish distributions would just ship vanilla desktop environments. All of the themed variants always have some issues. Maybe I'm just old and stubborn but that's my opinion.
Fuckin same. It took so long for me to realize a lot of issues I had wasn't because gnome was shit, it was because every distro fucks with gnome until it's unusable. I finally tried fedora and now gnome is my favorite DE and I love the workflow.
Yeah, distros should, at most, change the default accent color and some pannel icon, but no more than that.
Definitely OpenBSD's default fvwm
Does OpenBSD really default to FVWM in 2024? Metal.
Yes, and not even the modern fvwm3, due to licensing issues.
A blast of the past.
Garuda Hyprland edition. All the neon-RGB styling of Garuda gamer on top of Hyprland's smooth UI.
Upvoted. I forgot about this distro. I don't like its neon style at all but it's something different and pleasing for some people.
It's finally an opinionated distro I agree with. Of course you can get anything to look like anything but I just like how they picked a path and went so far down it to make their own unique out-of-the-box experience.
You're asking about the desktop environment and its default settings, which may or may not be the same on any given distro.
But I have a tie between Plasma and Cinnamon (mint's DE). They both take only minor tweaking to get where I want them, and I can use them both out of the box with zero complaints.
Many distros customize the colour schemes and theming of their desktops. The out-of-the-box XFCE in EOS looks nothing at all like vanilla XFCE for example.
The new COSMIC desktop by System76 and Pop!_OS is very promising. I've been running the pre-alpha, and have been very impressed.
The current pop_os dark is already pretty damn good, it's a very refined theme
EndeavourOS has a pretty nice colour scheme and wallpaper going by default.
If I was forced to use a default distro look, it would be that or Linux Mint probably.
GNOME
Fedora Workstation. Gnome is pretty great on the eyes, and there's a healthy Libadwaita apps ecosystem that is just *chefs kiss*
ElementaryOS also looks great for the system and core apps, although there's not really a third party app ecosystem that fits with the Pantheon theme, unfortunately.
I second this but after getting Hyprland setup to my liking I don’t think I’ll ever go back to gnome or kde
I think GNOME looks very visually appealing with it's consistency. The Libadwaita library has a nice aesthetic and looks very clean with nice spacing for elements to "breathe".
I still prefer KDE since I can tailor the look to my needs and I prefer to have clutter over extra clicks. (I have top bar with "Opened programs", Launcher, System tray, Time and a global menu and KWin script for managing Activities)
I feel like modern era of design has gone a bit overboard with the "clean" direction. It can be contrasted with Windows XP where you click "All programs" and you literally get all programs in the start menu with options of how to run or open them. I prefer to do "Menu" - > "Submenu" - > "Thing I want".
Come to think of it I should probably make a launcher for KDE.
Pop!_OS
Gnome with a bit of a macOS twist. I really like it. I'm excited for Cosmic!
deepin or zorin
Linux Mint has a smooth, out-of-your-way look & feel to either MATE or Cinnamon that just makes me feel at home
You mean Desktop?
Distro, I think Lubuntu does LXQt better than Fedora LXQt.
But LXQt is a huge mix of mostly KDE Theming.
Garuda Linux looks very nice
Honestly, whilst I would not recommend this at all, I find CutefishOS (you could argue it doesn't even need to be a distro) incredibly visually appealing.
Perhaps I will get downvoted for being a sucker for modern visuals, but the theme is consistent, simple and easy on my eyes.
Although I like GNOME, the consistency bothers me and some of the design choices are inconsistent and don't make for a great user experience, looking at Nautilus for example.
Pantheon desktop (Elementary OS)
As one comment mentioned, it depends more on the DE. But out of the box, I’d say Peppermint, Elementary, and Mint.
LMDE (Mint Cinnamon)
Xerolinux. It's basically a heavily themed KDE
Hmm there is stuff like Archcraft (maybe it has a different name now idk) that is made specifically for visuals. In terms of usable distros I'd say Xero is the best I know. It seems to be discontinued though. CachyOS has some nice WM setups too but the appealing visuals can't be consistent in that case because they are not full DEs and the unreasonably tiny calendar pop-up window from Xfce always ruins everything.
Really depends on the desktop but in terms of default desktops that are shipped with distros I'm picking Fedora's GNOME (pretty much stock) and MX Linux's XFCE.
Distros aren't going to be visually appealing as they typically and just standard desktops or CLI