arch (alone) is the only real choice , but you dont have it listed by itself.
kali to me is for sysadmins and black hats, so i dont really care for it.
ubuntu is what ubuntu is, a easy to use os.
arch is 500% better than either kali or ubuntu due to its configurability and user base; also awesome online support for it.
arch is far more configurable than the other 2 os’s and you can set it up however you wish. arch will easily do anything the other 2 do with minimal fussing.
so i vote arch + nothing will be more than sufficient.
Me: *thinks**oh look the arch fanboys have arrived and I totally didn’t post a poll for specific reasons**end thinks*
I didn’t put arch/fedora as a dual bootos is because I’m not familiar with them I would like to tinker with it before installing it as main operating system. @wr250
I’m actually going to be studying for my linux certified sysadmin certs and make a CEH in the mid-future. *tips white ha… wait a minute iT’S hAS ReD On iT…* *draws with white crayon*
Excess configuration is a feature but it can quickly become a hindrance for productivity.
I understand the differences between distro’s and their advantages and disadvantages. I choose those three for personal reasons and because i wanted to limit the potential for distro suggestions.