This is just "thinking out loud" case.
I was looking about other distros that use gnome. I don't know but I am liking it more and more and all the missing features of gnome 40+ in zorin are making me look at other distros. But nothing else compares to the design and feel of zorin.
So what needs to happen, how much work and trouble is it for zorin to become a stand-alone distro or maybe change from ubuntu to something else. in my eyes, fedora looks better than ubuntu under the hood. it updates more often and it has some useful features and techs it uses (and develops itself). I don't know much about the details and what ubuntu does under the hood, but what I liked about fedora was this zstd compression. it looks like it uses more cutting edge tech than ubuntu. or maybe solus or any rolling release distro?!
This is just "thinking out loud" case.
Fedora uses the RPM package system native to Redhat enterprise. Ubuntu is Debian based and uses apt for package management. Zorin is based on the long term support (LTS) versions of Ubuntu and will include the stable version of Gnome and the Linux kernel available on Ubuntu at the time of it's release.
I can't comment on how much work it would to build Zorin around the cutting edge versions of Gnome or if this even compatible to the goals of Zorin
developers. To get cutting edge versions of Gnome you might give Endevour OS a spin simply because it's easier to install than Arch Linux.
My experience with both Solus Budgie and Plasma has been very good though I can't comment on Gnome. Solus uses the eopkg package manager along with snap and flatpak.
There also is no real reason why Zorin OS 17 could not continue to use gnome 3.38.
The only reason not to; the divide between the users demanding that they want the latest version...
And those saying, "No thanks, the latest version is worse than the current version."
Fedora has a much shorter lifecycle than the Ubuntu releases. Ubuntu LTS is 5 years vs Fedora which is 13 months.
The only suitable base imo is Debian which has already been discussed on the forum.
I've always pushed for Debian, now it is Devuan - there are plenty of forks of Devuan too! And for DE it has to be KDE (Plasma) or LXQt (cf. Gnome and xfce).
If I wanted to use Gnome it would be Gnome 'flashback', which is available in Devuan install, alongside Cinnamon and MATE.
Gnome almost always releases a new version around the same time as the Ubuntu April release, so the latest version of gnome never makes it on that release due to the feature freeze during the Ubuntu development cycle.
but my point is to have something that changes faster. fedora is not a rolling release but the upgrade to a newer version is like a normal update.
I could argue that for many, Zorin is a bit too fast-paced as it is.
There are many who struggle with keeping their Wifi adapter working as the next release of updates kills it.
Not to mention the Deprecated code or commands or fixes that suddenly stop working.
And Kernel Regressions.
I admit that I find it interesting...
On Windows 11, the device manager is pretty much identical to the one I used on Windows 2000 NT or on XP.
A two trillion dollar well supported company that holds almost 90% of the market moves at a Much Slower Pace than Linux does.
And this isn't bragging.
Linux could really stand to Slow the Hell down.
Take a moment to appreciate the moment.
And stop breaking things.
interesting point view. but windows, same time, ships a lot of updates. some with no noticeable changes and some with noticeable changes, that sometimes even cause anger from the user base. some things should maybe stay as they or but some things must change. and it's not that microsoft doesn't want to give windows a new look and feeling. but somehow it messes up. like the new design they started implementing from windows 8. it's still not consistent even after 3 versions of windows (8.1, 10 and 11).
I like more cutting edge stuff being added that's why I use Arch and Fedora I guess. Some might argue that it is unstable but I have never had any packages breaking.
I had no problem neither. in most forums or social media I see mainly acer users complain about things.
I wouldn't want to have the latest bleeding edge, but cutting edge. new things that are tested to work. this is linux, people can stop updates. but same time, those who want to stay updated should have the option. it doesn't have to come to "well, if you want the latest then use this distro". I hate to change distros. but I want it to evolve continuously.
the zorin team appears to be small, and I think for them it fits better to be based on fedora than on ubuntu. as much as I can tell, it looks like the to go way of installing apps in fedora is flatpaks (correct me if wrong). so this way the zorin team can focus more on their extra features instead of testing packages. what I hate on ubuntu is this version different packages (focal vs bionic vs [insert name]). if the zorin team can somehow get rid of this problem then it would become the best linux distro imo.
I think to stand alone, it's too complicated. Some tutorials about Linux I have ever found on the internet have been obsolete(outdated) and irrelevant so it needs to be updated so as not to confuse for newcomers.
the problem nowadays is that many applications still depend on Systemd, so devuan might not be an option for a distro like Zorin
Red Hat has had a long-term aim to be rid of /etc - then your choices would be limited even further!
yeah, for example, the Wayland protocol in of itself for a long time had a hard-dependency on Systemd as well, until one of the devs basically said "this sucks" and made a library to handle the same things on non-systemd systems
That's correct but it's much "faster" than other so called rolling releases and upgrading is as easy as drinking a glass of water.
Apart from that, I'd stick to Ubuntu but this decision is up to the developers...
but why is fedora so easy to update it? I never tried it but I am curios to know
Fedora is quite good with user experience
They generally adapt new technology fast, and even bring some of their own before anyone else, specifically:
- Offline updates
- their own DNF plugin to update from one release to another
Offline updates applies updates to software packages (which aren't user applications) after a reboot (and only if the user asked for it!)
This prevents applications from breaking because of updated dependencies
Flatpak is updated seperately and without a reboot
Fedora allows you to up/downgrade releases through a DNF plugin, though, they also implemented that DNF plugin into GNOME-Software and I think Discover too, allowing you to see a new release from there, it's changelogs, and then to update to that new release
You can try it right now on Fedora 35 to upgrade to Fedora 36 (in-dev) by running the following for example:
sudo dnf system-upgrade --releasever="36"
or by just waiting for it's full release, when it will show up in your software frontend
I am trying fedora on my old laptop. one thing that seems confusing to me, compared to zorin, is the software center. a lot of apps are missing there. why so and how can the list of apps be expanded?