There are many great distros. My favorite Linux distro is a new one named FortMacTux. Its easily the "Best intro to linux distro" But I may be less than objective. ;)
By the way, I love your magazine. Its been a great reference many times, and a joy to read.

.. for the DESKTOP...

bla bla bla..

'Parted Magic'

LOoo0OL

xD yeah, Parted Magic ftw *,*.. no wait, for the Desktop. LOOL

Ubuntu Ultimate Gamer's Edition rocks! Been using it for a couple of years now
PLus there's also a 64 bit edition out
ubuntu

For me Puppy is one of the VVGO (Very Very Good Ones ), i use it on an old noteboock... but in my big pc i'm trying to use kubuntu... even i can not conect it to web... something with the adsl key...

i chosed debian but i'm using (debian,ubuntu 9.04,mint 7(Gloria)) funny chain isn't it..!

First..the debian based are the best..
the first reason is the apt manager ...and for all those who love the fedora distro (I don't hate any linux distro) but the fedora is a labRatt !!!(common)
and there is no quest that apt is way better than rpm.

VectorLinux. Gives new life to older hardware and screams on newer hardware. Stable, well-designed, looks good, and has a wonderful user community. Try it--you'll like it!

Slackware's stability, security, and simplicity are the best choice!

We also have Official 64bit Version if you must know! :)

Kudos to Pat and the Slackware Team!!

ubuntu sucks . debian is the best distro .

I use Fedora, but I love LINUX!

It's hard to figure it out wich distro it's the most used, because most people in linux use at least 2 distros and sometimes neither of the distros is the principal (in every day tasks). That's my case, because i use kubuntu and fedora with equal relevance for my job, and i don't feel that there's a need to stay with one distro.
They are all beautiful, and their differences are all apparently.

I chose Mint, but I'm also happy with my installs of Ubuntu 8.04, AntiX 8, AntiX 8.2 test1, and Mepis 8.

I'm giving Ubuntu my vote, but if a few rather serious bugs in 9.04 aren't given some serious attention I may begin to look at some other distributions.

I do enjoy Mint, Fedora, and even at times I can get into using Ubuntu, but I have never understood why Mandriva doesn't get much attention. i have been using it for some time and it has worked really well on the desktop. Especially the 2009.1 spring distro. Really nice.

LFS it's the best to me.

antiX for a fast, lean and mean desktop for older and new computers.

Where's ArchLinux?

I would go Fedora over Ubuntu, OpenSuse, and Debian myself, Fedora captures all that I love about Linux in a fairly neat distro, the only other distro that I've found to be close was gentoo, however despite the appeal, it was a ground up build and I like being able to just install my distro and run with it from the get-go. Despite the fact that there are a few custom aliases such as "ll" for ls -l and such like and that it uses yum instead of apt (although you can use Apt in fedora anyway so I don't see the big fuss myself I've found Yum more than adequate as a package manager and no slower than Apt at finding packages) and that maybe some items are in different locations (the people that argue this as a reason for not adopting Fedora have probably been using Unix and Debian for a fair while and are used to everything in the same place as set in Debian, therefore maybe sticking with what you know would be more recommended) but I've found Fedora keeps pretty much everything in the same general locations (e.g. /usr for applications and user installed apps, /var for logs, cache files, mail spool etc, /etc for services and configuration files) in the end it probably doesn't matter, people will always gravitate to the distro that suits them best, but for myself, Fedora has the under the hood complexity, along with the ease of use of the Desktop interface that make it a great distro for me

Can someone please explain to me why/how Ubuntu and Kubuntu are considered different distributions? Yes, I know one uses GNOME and one uses KDE, but they are both produced by Canonical, both use the same package managers, both use the same repositories, both use the same Linux kernel, both are released on the same day with the same version numbers and same animal nicknames, and both are supported in the same forum. In the meantime, the last time I tried an openSUSE LiveDVD, it had both GNOME and KDE on it, but it is only listed once in the above list. If it is the fact that they come on different CDs that make them separate distributions, then 32-bit version of Ubuntu comes on a separate CD than the 64-bit version of Ubuntu, but they aren't considered different distributions... at least, I don't think they are.

Oh, and my favorite is Ubuntu/Kubuntu/Xubuntu, although I have worked with Debian, Fedora and openSUSE.

After a year of trying to tweak Xubuntu to perform a little better than choppy and sluggish on my old Dell (PIII, 512) (the update to 9.04 made it worse), I gave the Puppy 4.0 live CD a try.

What a breath of fresh air! It's snappy performance both online and off has sold me. Wireless setup is a breeze, and it's array of tools allow you (or me, anyway) to accomplish most tasks suitable to the desktop.

I've been a happy Kubuntu user for the past 2.5 years but the Ubuntu family of distros have been plagued by a serious bug for over a month now that causes computers to completely freeze up. There's a lot of angry Ubuntu users in the Ubuntu forums and on Twitter that are griping about this and a lot of them have started switching to new distros since the problem seems to be mostly affecting Ubuntu users and the Ubuntu development team hasn't really addressed the problem. I'm leaning towards Debian at this point...