Linux

Thanks to image-based distros like Fedora Atomic, I skipped the asking to update step. They download and apply updates in the background, and then the new image gets selected on next boot.

Given Fedora doesn't do major changes in point releases, nothing breaks (until I do a manual upgrade to a new (half-)yearly major release).

Not having a terminal does not make sense (unless in a business context). For some people (my mum) it's as if it doesn't exist anyway, so why remove it.

I wouldn't like that, no sir, I wouldn't like that at all!

Too many useful tools on the terminal.

Not even Microsoft has a Windows distro without a terminal.

I feel like you think the terminal is just for installing updates...

The linux terminal is why I use linux.

vim, diff, cat, grep, sed, awk, and sort are so freaking powerful and useful.

You literally use Mint without ever opening the terminal if you’re just a regular/casual user. The update manager notifies you of new updates and you can use the gui.

Unsure if you're being serious or not. Or if this is just bait. So I apologize in case I just got whooshed.

There's a decent amount of distros that don't require you to ever operate a terminal. Updates either

• happen automatically in the background
• Or, you're prompted for an update and can choose to run it
• Or, within settings or a dedicated app, you can press a button to initiate the process of updating

Furthermore, most distros that are recommended for beginners don't need regular updates anyways.

Updating isn't the only part that has been taken care of by this set of distros. Linux has become pretty smooth sailing overall.

Notable exceptions to the above are mostly tied to some janky/troublesome hardware setup. Or, if you'd like to run software that isn't easily accessible. In those cases, while a GUI-only solution may exist, it's simply a lot easier for all involved parties if a terminal solution is offered instead:

• it works on most distros; irrespective of version, DE, base distro or whatsoever. So, the one providing a solution doesn't have to create over a dozen of distinct solutions to cover all bases
• these methods tend to change a lot less frequently. Sometimes solutions are tied to DEs, and these may change how they organize stuff over time. So, terminal solutions have better longevity
• instead of moving through dozens of menus/toolbars/buttons or whatsoever, you literally copy and paste a couple of commands and you're done. I would prefer the terminal any day

OP, you did get me curious, though. Which distro do you use?

I’d rather have one with no window manager than one with no terminal.

I don't care much about Neofetch and flatpak, but how would I run my scripts without a shell?

I reckon that would make me switch back to Mac exclusively ;)

Get Ubuntu, uninstall the terminal emulator, disable vt switching, there you go.

then I would install one

Are you high?

No flatpak? Who uses flatpak in the terminal?

Also pretty much every distro has some sort of GUI update manager.

What does that even mean? But yes lots of us run Linux on servers. Just ssh in. Or even just wipe the VM and launch a new one if you want to upgrade.

I think most people wouldn't recognize it as a real Linux distro just like android and chromeos.