Ubuntu has been around for years, if not decades standard recommendation For anyone who wants to switch from Windows to Linux. Backed by a large organization like Canonical, Ubuntu undoubtedly has the most coordinated resources behind it to create a reliable and predictable experience.
But the Linux landscape has evolved a lot, and what used to be the driving force in the Linux space seems to have become the ball and chain that holds it back. At least, that’s how many in the Linux community see it, and I can see why.
I’ve made it no secret that I’m not a huge fan of Ubuntu, and Fedora is increasingly becoming the default recommendation for new Linux users, and for good reason. Although Fedora has its flaws, Canonical often makes bad decisions that help Ubuntu lose popularity.
Snap option over Flatpak
Sometimes the standard exists for a reason
Distributing applications on Linux in general can be a bit confusing, as many different distros support different packaging systems and package managers by default. But in 2015, something called Flatpak It offers a new way to distribute applications on Linux that can be easily supported by any distro, while also adding a layer of security by running applications in a containerized environment. Flatpak was widely adopted by many Linux distros, but Canonical had different plans for Ubuntu.
Instead of embracing Flatpak, it could effectively do so the For getting apps on Linux, Ubuntu introduced Snap, a somewhat similar packaging system that’s actually worse in a few key ways. For one thing, Snaps can be even more restrictive for developers, causing some apps to choose not to accept it. However, Ubuntu has been criticized for requiring its own official “Snap store” for anyone using Snap, giving Canonical more control over what can be distributed.
Although Snap is supported on many Linux distros, it’s easy to see that adoption isn’t at the same level, and Ubuntu suffers for it. But it actually hurts every other distro as well, because Flatpak adoption can be more significant if the entire ecosystem embraces it. This would be a big step in addressing the “implementation gap”.
Increasingly high resource usage
How did we get to this point?
One of the main points of discussion when it comes to comparing Linux to Windows is how lightweight Linux can be and how it can still support low-end or legacy hardware. But looking at Ubuntu, that seems less and less true as time goes on. Canonical, the default for many people, felt the need to load Ubuntu with a lot of things to make things easier, but in doing so, Ubuntu became almost as bloated as Windows in many ways.
We’ve talked about this before and there are options to have a lighter Ubuntu experience, but check out what’s happening with the upcoming release of Ubuntu 26.04. You need a minimum of 6GB of RAM to run Ubuntu with this release, which is 50% more than that. Windows 11. You could argue that Canonical wants to ensure you have a good experience by meeting the minimum requirements, but in my opinion, that’s not really the point of the minimum requirements. Therefore, the software often has additional recommended features.
When Fedora still allows you to install the operating system on only 2 GB of RAM (although in these cases it is recommended to use a desktop other than the default GNOME), this is a bit ridiculous.
The default desktop is alienated
GNOME is not for everyone
There’s also the fact that Ubuntu ships with the GNOME desktop environment, and indeed only GNOME. There are officially approved Ubuntu derivatives that use various desktops, but you won’t find them easily on the Ubuntu website, and they’re not maintained by Canonical, so you never know how reliably they’ll be supported.
GNOME is often considered beginner-friendly, but for a user coming from Windows, I believe it’s a detractor. It just looks and feels very different, and the customization options are somewhat limited unless you’re logged in GNOME extensionsbut first you need to know what they are.
Fedora’s official website has two official flavors for desktop users. Of course, GNOME is the “real” default, but the KDE version is next to it with the same level of official support. Again, it’s a matter of preference, but even if you like GNOME better than KDE, just having a choice there is great. You can choose what works best for you right from the start, and for most people I’d say KDE probably makes the most sense.
Ubuntu makes you feel like GNOME is the only option, and it’s customized in a way that doesn’t make sense for everyone.
Fedora is on the bleeding edge
Ubuntu is a bit slower
While this last one won’t work for everyone, it’s worth noting that the speed of updates is much faster on Fedora, meaning you’re almost always on the bleeding edge. Fedora still does a reasonable amount of testing and isn’t as prone to issues as Arch, but you get new features, fixes, and improvements at a much faster rate.
If you prefer non-LTS releases, Ubuntu has a faster cadence option, but it usually lags behind the latest updates in the Linux kernel and other packages, which makes Fedora more interesting for new developments. Again, whether or not you prefer a faster update cycle is entirely a personal choice, and I don’t necessarily hold it against Ubuntu.
Fedora is an easy choice
When you see the route Ubuntu has taken over the past few years and what the Linux landscape looks like these days, it’s easy to see why Ubuntu has lost some traction among Linux fans. In some ways, it’s gotten so big that it feels the need to look more like Windows, for better or worse.
At this point, it’s easier to recommend other distros, and Fedora may not be perfect for everyone, but it’s not surprising to see it recommended more often.
