hashhsah I know the cycling I started in Linux with Slackware in 1998, since then I have tried so many distros that I am a chronic distro hopper. I am hoping I can stay for a change with Solus, I just always worry with small independent distros that they could easily go under 
If not solus, what distro would you be using
[deleted]
[unknown] Thank you for your answer, this information is indeed very interesting, however I had no problems with KaOS and I loved their philosophy, too. 
If I wasn't using Solus...(past RedHat, Debian, SuSE, Ubuntu, Fedora) it would be Arch. But that's what dual boot is all about
6 days later
I was doing a lot of research before impulse, and luck I suppose, brought me to Solus. That said, I would have been running Linux Mint.
I would use Zorin, because it doesn't break and it's idiot proof.
lekkerlinux zorin is my second distro on my dual boot device running next to solus unstable. To me it's the Ubuntu that Ubuntu tries to be. Although the fact that it's not rolling and is still tied to any decisions canonical decides to make rules it out of competing with solus for me
adurante Yes, I have used Zorin since 2013 and tried many distros last year. They all had problems like freezes and crashes or the default music player not working when I try to put my Cd's on my pc. I had to return to Zorin because it was reliable. It just got slower over the years, using the same desktop PC.
I having only been using Solus since last week and have only experienced one crash in the game 0AD this morning. It's not that important and only the game crashed, not the whole system.
I was looking at Zorin too, but like Ubuntu there seems to be a bit of the telemetry stuff going on that I DESPISE. I did not want to go through the hassle of disabling any of that stuff, so I passed it up all together. The only thing I can think of that I'm not stoked about with Solus is that mandatory updates will get installed any time you run updates (or perhaps whenever you use the software manager). It's not that the updates themselves are bad, it's just the principal. However, that's a matter for a different thread.
Mandatory? Don't you have a choice to update or not?
Thaeris I'm not too concerned about telemetry. I don't have any info the Americans or Chinese would want.
synth-ruiner another rolling-release distro I forgot about is Void Linux. anyone have any experience with it? looks a little bare-bones but maybe that's a good thing.
Void is very bare-bones. Without a strong background it would be hard to manage Void. I'd say that Void is like Arch, how it was around 2005, not now.
Void offers ready-to-use ISOs with various DEs. But installed systems are just a bit more than a pure terminal. Freshly installed Cinnamon = 3G. Freshly installed Mate = 2G. No preinstalled tools, no software of any kind, no systemd, no running services, no graphical package managers, nothing is pre-configured. It's up to user to build a system from ground up.
You get nude and crude terminal governed by xbps. Like vanilla Arch with pacman only. It's just luxurious.
There's no systemd in Void, so I can't measure exact boot times, but Void roughly boots up twice as fast as Arch. Seems impossible, but the impression persists on each boot.
Void uses runit as init and supervisor subsystem. A user isn't forced to learn Poetteringish to break through the maze of a confusing systemd. Runit is clean, logical, simple to manage. All services, daemons - much less than in systemd - are under a full user's control, at any time.
I run Arch since 2005, so building a system from scratch with CLI is not a problem, but a few times Void has made me to desperate. I hated Void at those moments, but a day later was returning back to it. Reward and satisfaction are enormous when you make Void to run as you wish.
Even when you get a fully working Void system it doesn't grow up too much. Void Cinnamon, started from 3G, grew up to 4G+ here.
Arch is tediously stable. Only Debian Stable is as stable as Arch. I was bored with it, so started to look for new adventures, preferably similar to those in vanilla Arch.
Void seems to be the only competitor for Arch. It's very enjoyable system.
just thanks for the perspective! I am pretty curious to try it out- maybe in a VM or on one of my lesser-used computers.
14 days later
KDE Neon and Debian Stable (with Openbox). Two best distros I've used. So far.
I think Solus Budgie, Solus Mate or perhaps Solus Plasma. So far I will stick to Solus Gnome.
Pop OS or ubuntu budgie.
Maybe reborn os or endeavor. But I really prefer something more stable as ubuntu rather something edge like arch
Ubuntu gnome on Wayland bcoz it's so freaking smooth.
I have a Ubuntu Budgie/Win 10 dual boot running happily together on the desktop and only Solus Budgie on the laptop. UB lead me to Solus.
8 days later
Pop! 
As I had to use Debian for my projects when I was in university. Then I went to ubuntu due to ease of access. Right now I have Win10+Solus+Pop!_OS.
(Solus being me daily driver, Windows 10 for windows specific sw and Pop! for backup )
Hmm, tough choice. I'm not a distro-hopper, but I do move around when I have a reason to.
I came to Solus from Manjaro. Before that I was running MX. I really liked MX, but even as a rolling distro, app versions were a bit too far behind for me and new versions were a bit to slow to be added to the repo's for my liking.
I will say that Solus has been the only distro that I have ever tried where all of the software I needed was quickly and easily found.
I've never used eopkg before, but I didn't have any issues picking it up and using after scanning the man page once.
I've only been using Solus for a couple of days, but so far so good !!!
I was happy with Pop!_OS.