Okay, this has turned into a complete waste of time. It's impossible to talk to a person who makes up their own definition for words and demands proof of something most of the Linux community is in agreement. You're the Linux equivalent of a flat earther.
Mint focuses on stability as evident from its decision to use Ubuntu LTS versions as it's base. In case I need to spell it out, LTS versions are generally more stable and reliable.
And you brought up X11 as a negative, but there's a good reason Mint is staying on X11. Yes, Wayland is the future and eventually Mint will adopt Wayland as well, when Wayland becomes more stable. I'm the mean time Mint stays on X11 because X11 is very stable, extremely stable compared to Wayland if you have an Nvidia card.
Mint also has better out the box support. For example to my knowledge for Nvidia Fedora comes with Nouvuea drivers which means for gaming you need to go through an extra process to get proprietary drivers. Mint has out the box support for Nvidia drivers. This is less of a thing when compared to Bazzite, but still a reason why to pick Mint as a beginner distro.
And the reason people recommend Mint is in those first two points. Mint deliberately sacrifices fancy bells and whistles to be as stable as possible. You not knowing that shows how little you know about Mint.
Specializes in giving beginners Linux, can't name a single good reason why people recommend Mint to beginners (now or in the past), except for it having a GUI and guides. I don't know about the beginners you're "helping" but based on this conversation I wouldn't trust a single recommendation, suggestion or opinion from you.
That does NOT have very little to do with beginners, being a highly supported distro is one of the most important things for beginners
Beingly highly supported is a prerequisite to being a good beginner distro, but it's not a reason to recommend a distro. If we take it as a reason then Mint having a GUI is also a reason to recommend to beginners.
having guides for how to do things written specifically for your distro is fantastic for new people.
This is where we're going to completely disagree. Guides in general are good, but I doubt any beginner actually cares about guides, unless it's a guide telling you what to click where on the GUI. A good beginner distro has to work for the user without the need of any guides.
It being beloved is why it's recommended, yes, and that doesn't benefit new people, but that's an obvious reason why one might recommend it...
Instead of playing the prying game where I keep prying until you give straight answers (because people don't love Mint just because it's an Ubuntu fork) I'm just going to conclude that either you deliberately don't want to say why people recommend Mint to beginners or you actually don't know why people recommend Mint. I don't care which it is because both invalidate your opinion of the Mint suggestion being outdated.
There's also the fact that it's designed to be easy to use, but that also applies to fedora, and fedora is significantly more well-developed, so it's not really relevant here.
Somehow you think the ease of use isn't relevant because it also applies to Fedora, but support is relevant despite it also applying to Fedora? How about some consistency in your arguments.
The only reason Mint is suggested to beginners is because it's "a highly supported, beloved distro"? A reason that has very little to do with beginners?
I disagree. Obviously the most ideal solution would be the have immutable Mint, but beginners need stability more than they do immutability. I've used mint and my only issue with Mint was that I didn't like how it looked. I'm currently on Bazzite and these are the issues I've ran into:
Every time I start Firefox it asks to be made into the default browser. Even if I click yes it will still ask again next time I start Firefox.
When using the default audio sometimes the audio signal to my monitor cuts off which means I no audio comes from the speakers. If I tell the system to send the audio to my other monitor and back to the one I have hooked on the speakers then it instantly works again. It's almost like the system forgets it has to send out audio. I don't remember what I did to fix it but it definitely wasn't beginner friendly.
Sometimes one of the monitors freezes and only one. The second monitor keeps working just fine. So far haven't found a permanent solution for this issue.
There have also been some minor artifacting that I personally don't consider an issue but someone else might.
Overall I can put up with the issues because I've pretty much conceded that I'm going to have issues. But I don't think new users should be using a system where they're going to run into problems they're most likely not equipped to fix. That why I recommend Mint to newcomers because all the fancy bells and whistles don't matter if the system doesn't work. Mint doesn't have bells and whistles, but it just works.
They don't want to buy the browser. They want to buy the brand and the users. Chrome makes up over half the browser market. Think of all the data they could extract from Chrome users. It would cost significantly more to fork chromium and grow the user base to a point where they could extract anything valuable from them, and that's assuming they'd be successful enough to make it happen.
I'm starting to feel like this is a controversial opinion, but maybe the American people should be the ones holding their own government accountable? Interventionism is the worst way to fix a country and I very much doubt it even could be done for a country like America.
Norris doesn't have the mentality to fight for the championship. He's good when the stakes are low but the higher the stakes get the more he starts to make mistakes. He simply gets stuck in his own head.
The telemetry shows both of them rushed into the corner because they were both fighting to be first into the apex, that's the game. Max didn't slow down because Piastri didn't slow down. It was a great move by Piastri, why do you have to diminish it by not acknowledging what Piastri did. Does Verstappen live rent free in your mind that you have to make everything about Max?
I haven't see how the level scaling works, but I'm assuming it works exactly like OG Oblivion for two reasons. First is that the underlying game logic is OG Oblivion and second, whether you liked it not, the level scaling was very much in the DNA of Oblivion so it kinda has to be there to feel like Oblivion. That said, the new leveling system looks like it might make the level scaling less horrid.
And so far from what I watched others play, the world is still as barren and boring as OG Oblivion. Personally I'm going wait for Skyblivion because the barren world was the main reason I didn't enjoy Oblivion.
If that helps you sleep, go ahead and don't continue reading.
But if you look at how Piastri took the corner in the quali vs how he took it in the race it's pretty clear he deliberately ran wide. Why would he run wide and compromise the exit of T2 if he thought Max would never make the corner? Maybe his post race interview gives a hint, where he explicitly states "if it was roles reversed it probably would've looked identical". It's almost as if Piastri knew he couldn't leave Max any space because Max would make use of that space the same way he would've used that space if the roles were reversed and Max had left him space. I wonder who is more right? A random F1 viewer on Lemmy stating Max would've have made the corner, or Max (who decided to try to take the corner) and Piastri (who clearly cut him off to make sure he couldn't make the corner) thinking he would've made the corner. Definitely a tough choice here.
Oh and thank you for proving my point about how it's always Max's fault.
had he (Piastri) also gone off Max wouldn’t have received a penalty.
Lando should've given his position back because if he believed Max was in the wrong (and because some people can't be normal I have to explicitly mention Max was in the wrong) then Max should get penalized. He didn't give the position back and got penalized himself. Same thing with Max. If Max believed Piastri left him no space then he should've given the position back because if Piastri was in the wrong he should get penalized. Max didn't give the position back and got penalized himself.
The sidenote wasn't about the exact same move that Max did in COTA, it was about the fact that Piastri did was Verstappen has done multiple times. Every time Verstappen does something like that people come out in droves to complain about the move. But now that it was Piastri you don't see 10 different commenters on what a scummy move it was, instead anyone critical of the move gets downvoted. My sidenote wasn't a defense of Max (nor is it an attack on Piastri because I don't have an issue with moves like that). It was a jab at all the Max haters who like to think they're being fair and standing against scummy moves when really they complain only when Max is the one making the move.
Okay, this has turned into a complete waste of time. It's impossible to talk to a person who makes up their own definition for words and demands proof of something most of the Linux community is in agreement. You're the Linux equivalent of a flat earther.