Ubuntu Budgie vs Solus?

UBUNTU 20.04 BUDGIE CONS---
--software center a hot mess between gnome sc and synaptic. both "main" repos that show you software marked "UNSAFE" and then give you the install button and package approval. how responsible is that? I didn't bother with the other two or three repos.
--thoroughly shady by pushing snaps as your first choice---, some kind of crooked deal here. snaps integrate into Plank. Flatpaks do not. Ehhh. My Flats don't make it to app menu surprise the Snaps do. Nothing weird there...Flatpaks are the #2 thing they push on you. DEB OH DEB FILE wherefore art thou? ("NOWHERE" echo echo echo) Sus/ as the kids say.. Ubuntu Budgie does not offer deb files for FF and Chromium....they sell Chromium in their SC as "a deb installed with Snap." wth? a debian distro without deb packages for the big apps????
Me at Canonical office revamp: "Could you tell me what it is exactly that you do here?"
UBU/DEB: 8 ways to skin a cat
SOLUS: 2-3 ways to skin a cat---much preferable. (when you lessen the variables for failure rather than kitchen-sinking the variables...)
--biggest complaint: appearance of a dishonest ethos, sensibility, and vision. Or at least one where priorities were decided by way too many knuckleheads. When you get used to Solus' honesty and simplicity this is really hard. I've been around long enough to know that .deb packages are the foundation of debian distros, not Snap. It's like they are embarrassed by .debs now....
--two clocks on desktop on purpose? Really? What for?
--dpkg and apt are the same commands? why? what for? why not one?

20.0.4 PLUSES:
--totally AWESOME implementation of Budgie. Edge: Solus but past tense
--can install outside .deb packages easy instead of hassling with targz or source code (again, get used to getting your debs outside ubu...)
--Nautilus is default file manager and is fully functional
--In this Budgie I can move my desktop files wherever I want them
--last but not least it's Budgie!
--I'd have to say a millisecond slower than Solus but this is negligible
--retained gedit and gnome-disks as defaults. these are superior to me
--I like gnome-terminal but default Tilix is very similar
--printer and scanner detected, drivers no hassle but some work.
edit:--can use open source nouveau drivers here. usually I need NVIDIAs everywhere I go including solus...I know that has to do with the chemistry of hardware parts and nothing else

shooting from hip with little knowledge of Deb or Ubu history (except telemetry scandal way back), 6 hours straight of being in Ubu Budgie/

this feels like I'm dancing with the devil. I don't want to feel that way. there is so much recklessness in their philosophy compared to Solus. but the Budgie experience I craved is back and incredible here.
booting back into Mate now.
I got Ubuntu Budgie ready for daily use. It's not a matter of cutting the cord with Solus. I can do that. I only want a fully functional Budgie. But man when I log out of here I feel I need a shower. that's never happened before.
My opinion may change tomorrow. But I can say with confidence we got it good at Solus.

brent A few thoughts:

(1) The current LTS version of UB (and the one I believe you have installed) is Ubuntu Budgie 22.04 LTS rather than 20.04 LTS. I mention that only to clarify for people who read this thread.

(2) Ubuntu Budgie uses Nemo (not Nautilus) as the file manager. The change was made in 2019.

(3) With respect to Snaps: Snaps are a Canonical product. Ubuntu is a Canonical product. Ubuntu has been increasingly incorporating Snaps into Ubuntu and Ubuntu flavors as default for several years. The debate over Snaps has been vigorous and contentious, but Snaps are a fact of life for Ubuntu users.

(4) I tend to use distros OTB, installing little software, but like all Ubuntu users have noticed, when available, a Snap is usually listed first on the software installation list for that app. Debs are usually also available, but the user has to elect/select the deb installation.

(5) I would prefer that Ubuntu's software center clearly designated which installation options on a list were Snaps and which were debs, but I don't think that the practice of not doing so is "some kind of crooked deal", any more than Solus's failure to designate which apps in the software center are KDE and which are Gnome is "some kind of crooked deal". However, the failure to do so is a byproduct of the fact that Linux distros in general seem to assume that the user is experienced at a level many "ordinary home desktop users" are not. Linux could use a bit more emphasis on "truth in labeling" in many respects, and the failure of both Solus and Ubuntu in this regard is an example.

(6) Firefox and Chrome, both of which provide official Snaps, are available only as Snaps in the Browser Ballot, in line with Ubuntu's policies. Other browsers, such as Edge, for which Microsoft does not provide an official Snap, are available only as deb installations. A few browsers in the Brower Ballot are available in both formats. In the case of Firefox and Chrome, it is possible to install a deb, but the user needs to download the deb file and install the deb file through the installer.

(7) The "unsafe" designation (if you take a moment to read the description) means that a particular app contains proprietary code that cannot be checked, and the user is warned accordingly. The designation means only what it says it means. It does not mean that the app is malicious or contains malicious code, but only that the code cannot be checked and the user assumes the risk.

(8) When I used Ubuntu Budgie 22.04 LTS, I used the "Traditional Budgie" layout to approximate the Solus Budgie layout as closely as possible. The "Traditional Budgie" layout does not use a Plank, so I can't comment on Flatpak behavior on the Plank. However, Flatpaks installed on Ubuntu Budgie 22.04 LTS, like Flatpaks installed on Solus Budgie, require a restart before the app will show up in the menus. I wonder if that is also the case for the Plank.

You are having an obviously strong negative reaction to Ubuntu. Moving from Solus to Ubuntu does take some getting used to, and you may never get to the point where you are comfortable with Ubuntu. That is for you to decide. Ubuntu Budgie 22.04 LTS is an excellent implementation of the Budgie DE layer, and that's a fact. Whether UB is a distro you will want to use is up to you.

[deleted] BBQ

Oh ... of course. By the way, you deliberately misquoted me. Most folks would consider that in bad taste.

brent I just think too much was obscured for a newcomer going into it.

I think some of this is intentional, and some is just oversight. Ubuntu and it's flavors want to make migrating to desktop Linux easy (for the most part), showing users fewer options usually does that.
Think about the Windows Store and the App Store on Mac, you get one option for software. Can you go out and get your own from the web, absolutely. But for the "new" or "average" user who at this point probably grew up in the mobile space, that's where they're going to go. In this way, Ubuntu is trying to mirror that process and make installing, updating, and finding software as easy and GUI driven as they can.
It can be a pain for software not in the repos though, having to add PPAs, manually download and install .deb files, and manage updates or removals.
On the bright side though, I agree with tomscharbach that UB is a great implementation. Aside from snaps, the themes are well thought out and integrated, the changes like Nemo are very helpful, and overall it's a good example of what can be done on Budgie. Glad you like it, hopefully you don't get so comfy you want to switch permanently .

Brucehankins

I think some of this is intentional, and some is just oversight. Ubuntu and it's flavors want to make migrating to desktop Linux easy (for the most part), showing users fewer options usually does that.

Heh, the reason why I find Linux easier at times is the presentation of information. Troubleshooting Windows is pain since it tells the user almost nothing.

brent A mostly Snap-based distro took some getting my head around, even if they invented the Snap. I looked for documentation justifiying this approach but could find none.

I think that it is important to keep in mind that Canonical is an enterprise-level business, providing Linux solutions across the landscape from cloud to servers to desktop to IOT devices. Ubuntu is a part of the Canonical ecosystem, but not a stand-alone part or even the most important part. Ubuntu is a major product within the Canonical ecosystem, but is designed and intended to work across Canonical product lines and the market segments Canonical serves.

Spend an hour on the Ubuntu website, clicking on each of the major divisions (Enterprise, Development, Community) of that website and poking into the products listed in the divisions, and you will get a glimpse of the scope and range of Ubuntu. Most of us think of Ubuntu as a distro, because that is how we use Ubuntu, but in doing so we are looking at a very small part of what Ubuntu is in reality.

Snaps are a component of the Canonical ecosystem, designed to work with Ubuntu but also with other Canonical products. The genesis of Snaps had little or nothing to do with the desktop or even Ubuntu itself, as a 2019 interview with Martin Wimpress suggests. In the years since 2019, Snaps have developed significantly, but generally in line with the directions hinted at by the interview. The bottom line is that the Snap architecture is intended to be cross-platform within the Linux ecosystem, and Ubuntu's increasing movement towards Snaps is part of a larger picture.

With respect to the Ubuntu desktop, I think that it is relevant that Ubuntu has the lion's share of the Linux desktop market -- roughly 40% of all installs, as I remember. Many/most of those installs are business/corporate/education installs rather than "ordinary home desktop user" installs, but Canonical has an interest in making Ubuntu both secure and relatively easy to adopt and use, as well as keeping maintenance costs (time and money, both) to a minimum. Canonical is moving toward Snaps, in part, because Snaps facilitate Canonical's objectives. My view, anyway.