I want something that’s basically like Windows 98.

Linux Mint (Cinnamon edition) and Kubuntu are, in my opinion, the two most windows-looking distros out of the box. They use the Cinnamon and KDE desktop environment respectively, you can do a little googling to see if those look like you expect your desktop to work.

Does everyone just always know what they’re doing at all times?

Fuck no, lol. I’ve done more stupid shit on Linux than windows would ever let me get away with. But Linux people tend to be a little more “tinkerers” than other computer users. Not everyone by any means, it’s really more of the other way around: if you want to tinker with your computer, Linux gives the most freedom to do so. And when you tinker enough and make enough mistakes learning experiences, you tend to pick up some knowledge along the journey.

But a lot of the modern distros are very plug-and-play, to where it’s not necessary to be a tinkerer to get going on Linux anymore.

1. You dont download software from Websites
2. Use Lubuntu or other variants with LXQt or LXDE, dont do it yourself. They already have done the configs for you

I haven’t used Ubuntu in a bit, but I’m decently familiar with linux overall. Looked up a guide. It indicated you could install LXDE with sudo apt install lxde and then reboot. The guide said that LXDE should be the default Desktop Environment now, because it’s the most recently installed one. If for whatever reason LXDE isn’t the new default, on the Login screen, in the upper left corner there should be a dialogue box to select whichever Desktop Environment you want as the new default.

And even though this is lemmy, when I searched for “Ubuntu Help”, there’s no community named that. There’s also no community named “Linux help”. Which I find very very odd. Lemmy of all places you’d think would have a linux help community!

Have you been by !linuxquestions@lemmy.zip yet? Nevertheless, this community should work just as well.

There’s also !linux4noobs@programming.dev or a community with the same name on Lemmy World. When specificity in a search fails, falling back to broader/more basic terms may help (e.g. searching for Ubuntu or Linux).

So Ubuntu has a version called Lubuntu, which used to come with LXDE, but now it comes with LXQt. So this will require you to install LXDE with the tasksel command, unless you start with Ubuntu desktopless. But I’d say to definitely check out Kubuntu, it’s the KDE version, and I feel like KDE and LXDE are quite similar. Both have an older windows overall appearance.

You can install any desktop environment on any distro, but its better to choose one with it preinstalled.

If you want windows 95, maybe try something like linux mint xcfe or xubuntu with the chicago95 theme.

Also if you want ubuntu with a de other than gnome, download one of these.

Don’t download software from some random website.

Instead, use your package manager to install it or use something that ships with it. I would recommend Debian as its very stable and the installer gives you the option to install LXDE if you so choose. (Side note: LXDE isn’t well maintained) You likely will want to enable flatpaks for newer application support but that is pretty easy to do. Just go to flathub.org and choose how to install and then Debian

It sort of works, but as with anything on Linux, the reality is a lot less pleasant than in theory. For distros like Debian, it is very easy to install a new DE, since its baked into the installer, but other distros may or may not work as well if you try to install a completely new DE. I recommend trying a bunch of distros with different DE installed and find one that suits your needs.

Why are people like this?

Hey, welcome, fellow noob!

I hopped on the Linux train maybe 20 years ago and haven’t had any non unix system in maybe 15 years.

Also, I don’t know anything much. I can do basic tasks with a Terminal, but I don’t think for example I could install Arch from scratch. Or if I’d accidentally opened VIM, I’d have to kill power to get out again. But I like to tinker. If you like to tinker it’s a big plus, otherwise things, that don’t work instantly, might get frustrating.

As others said, use a pre built distro + DE environment, especially if you don’t really know what you do. Another thing that I’d recommend: a distro that be backed up easily. So you can tinker and start over, if necessary.

If I don’t know, how to fix a thing, I usually look up my question online. The problem with that is: I’ll find solutions containing commands that I don’t know, what they do. I have “fixed” my OS to death before, so it’s always nice to have a recent backup.

Ubuntu is the biggest, although it’s not old-school like win98 and comes with idealistic problems for many people. If you didn’t really enjoy it, I wouldn’t go back, just because it has the biggest community. Community isn’t only about size.

Mint is rock solid, I’ve run that a long time with different DEs.

Another distro, I can’t really recommend (as I haven’t used it further than live USB yet), but might be very interesting for you, is MX Linux. It comes with simple DEs and more importantly: a ton of GUI tools (including a back up tool where you can back up the entire OS including apps and settings as a flash USB).

I don’t know, if I was able to help anything. I just wanted to reassure, that there are (maybe even many) Linux users that don’t really know what they do.

As with many skills in life, I believe, the best way to learn is by just doing it. There will be failures. And each failure is a big opportunity to learn something.

Yeah, for newbies I always recommend sticking to the big distros meant for ease of use. Fedora, Ubuntu, Mint, Pop, or openSUSE. Only once you’re familiar would I recommend venturing into the harder and lesser known distros.

Once you pick one of those, you can download a “spin” or “edition” for the desktop environment you want. So, you’d want Lubuntu for Ubuntu+LXQt.

Linux Mint has already been suggested. I recommend the XFCE edition and adding the Chicago95 theme for a pretty close Windows95/98 look. That should be a reasonable starting point.

I will let you on a little secret.

The best “support” you can get is support from upstreams directly (I’m involved in both sides of that equation). But upstreams will often only “support” you when you 1. run the latest stable version 2. the upstream source code wasn’t patched willy-nilly by the packager (your distro).

So the best desktop linux experience comes with using rolling distro that gives you such packages, with Arch being the most prominent example.

The acquired knowledge that argues stability and tells you otherwise is a meme.

Just a minor suggestion. When looking for something different than what you’re currently familiar with, do so in very open minded way, hopefully no looking for clones to what you were used to, but willing to experience and learn new stuff (there’s no failure, just something new that had to be learned and experienced).

I know it’s easier saying than doing…

Looking for advice on giant communities is sort of hard, and in the end you won’t know what works better for you if you don’t try it. The open mind needs to come with some time to be able to play, and enjoy during the play, so it’s not a whole series of frustrations.

On this same forum (different threads/posts/converstions) I’ve read very different recommendations. Even though Manjaro has been recently getting a lot of bad reputation because of letting some certs expire, it’s still considered an “introductory” gnu + linux distribution. I’ve also read Mint is a pretty good “introductory” gnu + linux distribution as well, specially now that ubuntu has finally shown its inclination towards its snap store, rather than the good and solid dpkg + apt, which allowed it to grow on users to where it’s currently at.

I myself prefer rolling release models for distributions, and being as vanilla as possible, to be closer to upstream as possible. However I dislike systemd, which is just a personal taste, so I don’t have a specific recommendation. It used to be Manjaro offered openrc, but they dropped it, and the distributions I know are Artix (it has gui installers if that’s considered “introduction” level distribution, but one still need to handle the configuration mismatches with upgrades as with Arch), Gentoo (I wouldn’t say it’s not for starters, but for sure it has its learning curve, but more importantly you need to be aware that it’s a source based distribution), and Void. If you don’t really care, rolling release distributions, which might have an easy ramp up might be Manjaro as mentioned, and now I believe openSUSE Tumbleweed. maybe even fedora come close… Rolling release models might come even easier for newcomers, in my opinion, since there’s no need to think on what happens on major updates, but rather one needs to keep updating periodically, but hopefully the distribution helps supporting the safest and saner configurations natively so the user, and particularly newcomer to the distribution don’t have to deal a lot to get such safe and sane configurations, at least to start with. And that’s to me the important part to call it “introductory” distribution, easy installation might be part of it, but it’s hardly the majority of it, and this is perhaps the sad part of what I like about being as vanilla as possible, some distributions even take that as a mantra for configurations, and upstream developers don’t always have the safer, or the saner configurations by default. I believe Manjaro and some others take that into account to make things smoother to start with. Maintaining the distribution, keeping it up to date, being able to install stuff, has it’s learning curve, no matter the tools/frameworks to do so, and it might be harder if one has to deal with how to make things work because the software doesn’t work as it should (configuration required upfront), and it’s not hardened enough as well so the user needs to know that and do additional configuration upfront as well.

Think of it this way

There’s your core of the system, the kernel part. It’s the engine of the thing but basically its the package manager. This is what Ubuntu, Redhat, Arch, etc is. It’s all interchangeable in some ways and also locked into a specific place you get your packages and updates. It could be any desktop and all of the desktop environments or just a command line.

So more often than not, the core will favor a specific desktop environment. You can always install multiple environments and they’ll work but there’s some things that are suited for one desktop environment over the other. Many of the basic apps don’t work outside their environments. KDE apps don’t always work in Gnome and vis versa.

So when you download Ubuntu, your basically says give me the package manager that points to the Ubuntu repositories that will understand your version of the core and give you prepackaged software that is meant to work with Gnome.

If you go with Kubuntu you’ll get the same treatment but with the KDE desktop environment and all of its basic stuff.

But you can install KDE on Ubuntu and you can install Gnome on Kubuntu.

You can mix and match all the desktops if you want but at some point it does cause problems because the developers make different decisions and use different software that you’re package manager has to deal with.

So some distros do things different, have different configurations and package managers. I use Arch which uses pacman (package manager) to give you core software that they keep up-to-date and test but it’s limited in what it offers. So instead it has an AUR that can be accessed though many different sub package managers, like yay

I could go on but I hope this makes a little sense about the difference in distribution and desktop environments.

If you want a Windows 98 style desktop, look at KDE. It’s a lot like how Windows works