I feel like MX Linux has been at or near the top of Distrowatch forever, but I literally never hear it mentioned elsewhere on the web. Is it just people literally asking this question for them selves, clicking on it and bumping it up? Has anyone tried MX to see if it lives up?

  • edel@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    49 minutes ago

    Likely there is a combination of factors:

    First, as MX is catered mostly for a bit aged computers, it is likely the demographics of users are a bit more aged that other distros like CachyOS (which by the way, it is now in the crest of a wave, signaling Distrowatch ranking is not correlated with market share.)

    Also, the fact that many of us are pondering about MX’s high ranking, we are also clinking on it more that we would on Ubuntu or Mint so feeding the impressions count.

    Similarly, when a post like this is brought up, a bunch of use go to Distrowatch and click on it to see info about MX.

    Also a regional popularity must be at place… distrowatch probably is more prevalent is certain countries that MX is favored. I don’t see many in Asia using MX for instance, so western distrowatch distorts its global popularity. For instance if 3 users in the US use Mint and 3 MX but in China, that they barely go to distrowatch, 3 use Mint and 0 MX, distrowach would rank globally MX and Mint as same while in reality, Mint is clearly in top globally.

    Of course, it is also likely MX developers have a bit of incentive of clicking on Distrowatch for their baby… I don’t find it particularly too bad since many developers are doing far worse things… Using bots and dozens of different IPs would trespass the ethical boundaries for me though! MX is not the only ones that could potentially be doing this… it is not possible that Arch or Kubuntu are raked way bellow Q4OS, Lite, or Bluestar for instance. I see some artifacts among top famed distros too. It reminds me of the VW diesel scandal… VW was cheeting, but all other car makers were manipulating in one way or another their emissions too, it is just that US found it convenient to go for the foreign low hanging fruit.

    Best thing is for us to stop reading those rankings as anything more than distros that trend up and down and that is it. I categorize all distros we all hear about, from MX to Cachy, from Nobara to deepin all as equally competitive and the difference just catered to the needs of different users. The more unwarranted credit we give to these rankings, the more incentive we are given to manipulations.

  • AnthropomorphicCat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    10 hours ago

    Distrowatch ranking is just the distros that are more commonly searched on the site. The FAQ says “The page Hit Ranking represents hits per day by unique visitors”. It’s just an attempt to see what’s more popular among visitors.

    Yeah, maybe there is a feedback loop where people will click on the top one just to see why it is on top, and in doing so they give the clicks necessary to remain on the top.

  • Arthur Besse@lemmy.mlM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    12 hours ago

    It is now official. Netcraft has confirmed: Distrowatch is dying.

    One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered Distrowatch community […]

  • AndrewZabar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    15 hours ago

    I tried MX a few times on different machines maybe a few weeks/months apart. Every time I did because of it being up there at the top and I was like “What am I not seeing?” It’s a decent distro, yeah, but some of the customization is distracting to be honest. I can say it’s good but the top? For what… more than a year or two even, it’s been in the top few.

    I just don’t get it.

  • ikidd@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    15 hours ago

    Distrowatch has been gamed for years.

    I rarely see any references to MX in Linux forums, I don’t think it’s anywhere near as popular as DW would indicate.

      • ikidd@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 hours ago

        There was a pretty good indication that Manjaro was click-botting it a few years back, then Mint, and now MX. While I actually like Manjaro, that team is totally not above having done such a thing. And pretty much as soon as the rumors about that started, it mysteriously started dropping in the ranking…

        Why? For a long time, DW was considered a source of distro recommendation and popularity. With these “attacks”, it’s become a community joke and not considered much of a real indication.

        • AndrewZabar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 hours ago

          I cannot understand why anyone would be so childish. It’s not even as though money is involved; it’s some kind of juvenile popularity contest by people who clearly don’t believe their work speaks for itself, and clearly don’t take pride in their product.

          Manjaro defaults to a defective dock that is riddled with bugs if you customize it. I broke it dozens of times just by making some minor modifications in the preferences. It also slows down a little gradually. That’s only minor but the dock thing really irked me. Really? Can’t just get the dock settings finished so the thing completely works? Anyway, that was a few years ago and I haven’t touched it since.

  • darkan15@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    14 hours ago

    I think there is no ranking site that can be 100% trusted.

    That said, I trust linux-hardware.org a bit more than distro watch, even if it’s not as popular, because you have to intentionally download an app/script for it to scan and upload your distro/hardware data (so no page clicks or just traffic, you must have the distro installed), and if you repeatedly try to upload the same distro/hardware data, it doesn’t count multiple uploads on its statistics, if they are not at least a month apart.

    Edit: and even on linux-hardware you have strange results like OpenMandriva and ROSA as Distros on top 15, and I have never heard of them outside there, and from what I can find they are somewhat popular in Russia and some parts of Europe

    • SinJab0n@mujico.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      5 hours ago

      and even on linux-hardware you have strange results like OpenMandriva and ROSA as Distros on top 15, and I have never heard of them outside there

      As you have said they are REALLY popular in russia, and that alone makes a great ammount of people, specially since they still support i386 and older architectures with full support, thats why ALT linux is also really popular.

    • JasonDJ@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      15 hours ago

      But that just tells you all the people that have visited the site and downloaded a script.

      I find it hard to believe that OpenMandriva is the most popular distro. I distrohop quite a bit and never even came across it (currently using Nobora on my PC, KDE Neon in the living room, tumbleweed on the kids laptops (though I may move them to silverblue or another immutable), and Pop on my laptop. It takes me a minute when I sit at any console to remember which package manager is the right one)

      If you want honest results of actual use on general-purpose PCs…I’d wish for something like Alexa Page Rankings that could get deep enough to know Distro, but that’s not possible (I don’t think, without every distro having its own User Agent signature in the browsers), and Amazon bought Alexa and discontinued those services

      • darkan15@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        14 hours ago

        As I said on the first line, no ranking of any kind can be trusted 100%, I pointed out an alternative to distrowatch, and why I would trust it a bit more, not saying I really trust it, or that I believe every result.

        It is less popular so it could be a case like OpenMandriva has it integrated to upload automatically for all its users by default, or they found another way to game that ranking.

        When I see any ranking, I do research when I see a distro that is suspiciously positioned, and I haven’t heard about outside the place I saw it referenced, and even so I always stick to mainline distros.

        Honest results would need a standard way that every distro adopts and make an opt-out (not opt-in) regular upload thing similar to what linux-hardware.org does, and be actively trying to mitigate or deny certain distros or specific actors from tampering with the results, and we don’t have that.

        Page rankings, clicks, scripts, etc. are not enough if every device doesn’t ping it in a legitimate way (fake user agent or other means), and there is always the case of people that will opt-out or block this as they don’t want to be tracked.

        On your point of something like Alexa Page Rankings, the thing I would add is that, at least for me, if it is a ranking shown by a corporation, it is not trustworthy.

        • JasonDJ@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          14 hours ago

          Oh for sure, but at least Alexa’s rankings were rather transparent and somewhat trusted built up on a reputation.

          I hadn’t even realized Amazon bought and discontinued the service, but that’s clearly exactly the type of instance that needs to be guarded against. I’m sure that a big part of why Amazon wanted that Alexa gone was because it would show rising competition, and Jeff can’t have that.

  • 𝕨𝕒𝕤𝕒𝕓𝕚@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    40
    ·
    22 hours ago

    Distrowatch popularity is a pointless metric. IIRC they measure clicks on their own site as popularity. That means that people that just want to check out that distro near the top that they never heard of actually ensure that it stays near the top.

    • null_dot@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      19 hours ago

      This is true. I’m pretty sure they acknowledge this transparently.

      It’s helpful to hilight the common distro’s but it’s not an endorsement.

  • actionjbone@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    MX has become my go-to for low-power, outdated computers.

    It runs on a toaster. It installs on 64-bit systems with 32-bit EFI. The base install supports touchscreens. It fits on a 16GB SSD with room to spare. 2GB RAM is plenty. It has an active development community.

    If your computer is less 5 years old, there are better options. But if you’re trying to keep a Chromebook out of the junk yard, MX is a good choice.

    • AndrewZabar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      14 hours ago

      Oh, now come on… 5 years is hardly where a system becomes “old.” It’s 2025 right now. Using a system made in 2020 hardly differs at all from one made yesterday. I’d say a cutoff for considering slim distros would be more like ten years ago. I’ve got some systems that are older than that even and they blaze. Only a few things really put that kind of thing to the test: games and heavy graphics editing. Am I wrong?

    • Ŝan@piefed.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      16 hours ago

      Why? What makes it good for þat? Is it because þe kernel is trim?

      I ask, because MX isn’t þe base for any leading LXC “mini” containers, AFAIK. Alpine was þe top choice for a long time, alþough þere are competitors for minimum-sized containers. And while containers aren’t fully bootable images, and more is needed, probably þe biggest addition is þe kernel. If you stay away from systemd, you can add dinit, metalog, and crond for a smidge over 1 mibibyte (750Kib, 47Kib, and 230Kib respectively, vs systemd’s 36MiB).

      So I’m wondering: what makes MX so good for old computers?

      • actionjbone@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        11 hours ago

        Speaking just from my experience:

        It’s small, it’s stable, and it supports legacy hardware.

        In addition, its Xfce implementation is polished and easy to use. It has a straightforward package installation utility.

        I’ve used a whole bunch of lightweight Linux distros, and MX’s level of polish is uncommon for a distro that can easily live on a 16GB drive

  • daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    18 hours ago

    I tried MX Linux recently because of that.

    It’s nice but not my style. Specially the systemd thing. Trying to support both with and without with somehow more emphasis in “without” systemd.

    But it works quite good as a OS in a pendrive thingy. I has good default tools for that.

  • Dotcom@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    1 day ago

    Yes and yes, hits to the page drive it up that list. It’s a fine Debian reskin, nothing special.

  • Papamousse@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    17 hours ago

    I am using Linux since the 90s, used Ubuntu a lot at one time, then started using MX linux, 16.1 iirc was my first install. Then I continue to use it, I have always like Xfce (coming from mwm and such), and no systemd, no snap, no flatpak etc. MX is very stable, use the latest package in .deb format. I am using it for almost 10 years now, 24/7, I am using it as my work PC too.

  • Ulu-Mulu-no-die@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    23 hours ago

    I’ve been using it for a few years on my gaming desktop and I couldn’t be happier about it, it’s the distro that stopped my distro-hopping.

  • Dr Jekell@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    23 hours ago

    From what I understand about distrowatch is that their “ranking” system is based on how many people (or bots) visit a distros page.