Zorin OS vs. Solus: I tested two great Linux distros for beginners to find out which is best


Solus

Jack Wallen/ZDNET

Follow ZDNET: Add us as a preferred source on Google.


ZDNET’s key takeaways

  • Solus has come a long way since its humble beginnings.
  • You get just the right amount of preinstalled software and your choice of desktop.
  • Solus is close to Zorin OS, but two factors give Zorin OS the edge.

I recently tested Zorin OS 18.1 and dubbed it the best Linux distro – for anyone. I would go so far as to say that it’s the best OS I’ve ever used. That same day, I learned that Solus had a new release as well. 

Version 4.9 of Solus was released on April 18, and I opted to download the Budgie version of the OS. I’ve used the Budgie desktop many times and thought it would be a good comparison against Zorin OS.

Also: Why Zorin OS 18.1 is simply the best Linux distro – for anyone

Why make this comparison? That’s simple: I’m often asked which distribution is best suited for new users, and I always want to make sure I’m suggesting the right option. Because of that, I like to compare them — such as when I compared Linux Mint to Zorin OS

As I was testing Solus, it dawned on me that this Linux distribution could be easily recommended to those who’ve never used the open-source operating system. The more I dug in, the more I embraced that proposition.

But can it stand up to the mighty Zorin OS 18.1? That’s a high bar — let’s see if Solus 4.9 can reach it.

Preinstalled software

Just like Zorin OS, Solus has everything you need to get started without installing a single piece of software. You’ve got Firefox, Thunderbird, LibreOffice, Rythmbox, Celluloid, gedit (text editor), and all the usual bits and pieces that make up a desktop operating system.

Also: Can this $70 Linux app make up for the lack of Photoshop? I tried it to find out

And if you don’t find what you need, there’s a GUI app store (in the Budgie version, it’s KDE’s Discover) that has Flatpak support rolled in, so you can install a host of other apps (even proprietary ones like Slack and Spotify). 

Solus

KDE Discover is a great app store that anyone can use.

Screenshot by Jack Wallen/ZDNET

There’s one area where Zorin OS has the edge. If you attempt to install a Windows app (via a downloaded .exe file), Zorin OS will automatically inform you of an open-source alternative. For example, if you try to install MS Office, Zorin OS will tell you about LibreOffice. This is an important feature for new Linux users who don’t yet understand package managers or what can or cannot be installed.

Advantage: Zorin OS

Ease of use

Beyond the apps, the next thing you’ll want to know is if Solus is as easy to use as Zorin OS. I compared two different desktops (the Zorin OS uses a highly customized GNOME desktop, and, as mentioned earlier, I tested the Budgie flavor of Solus). In the end, both were very easy to use. They each offer a very familiar layout, include a simple menu where you can launch apps, enjoy well-designed notifications, allow you to install apps without ever touching the command line, and include all of the features you’ve grown accustomed to on a desktop OS (such as drag-and-drop, right-clicking, desktop launchers, and more).

Also: KDE Linux is the purest form of Plasma I’ve used in months – but there’s a catch

Were they equally easy to use? That’s a tricky question, because what’s easy for me might not be easy for you. On top of that, you can select a specific desktop environment for Solus, whereas Zorin OS offers only one desktop environment and lets you choose between four desktop layouts. (The Pro version gives you 10 layouts in total.)

That’s a point worth considering. If I imagine that I’m a new Linux user and I go to download Zorin OS 18.1, the task is simple. If, however, I’m a new user and I go to download Solus, I have to figure out which desktop version to download.

Advantage: Zorin OS

Aesthetics and customization

I’m not going to mince words here: Zorin OS is beautiful out of the box. No matter which layout you choose, you can be certain it’ll present an elegant desktop. 

Also: The best Linux laptops: Expert tested for students, hobbyists, and pros

With Solus, it depends on the desktop environment you select. Even then, it doesn’t quite match the beauty of Zorin OS. However (and this is a big however), some users prefer the simplicity and basicness of the Solus desktop designs. And while Zorin OS defaults to a light, airy theme, Solus leans heavily toward the darker side.

Solus

A customized Budgie desktop.

Screenshot by Jack Wallen/ZDNET

I prefer the lighter option, but I know many people who prefer dark modes. Of course, with each desktop Solus offers, you can change the theme fairly easily. Also, because Solus offers versions that include KDE Plasma and Xfce, both of which are highly customizable. I would go so far as to say that Xfce is the most customizable desktop on the market.

Advantage: Tie

Performance

This is where things get pretty simple. Although Zorin OS performs very well, you’re locked into the GNOME desktop. With Solus, you can choose the Xfce version, which is much lighter and faster. Even the Budgie version of Solus feels slightly faster than Zorin OS.

Also: You can use Linux 7.0 on these 7 distros today – here’s what to expect

I’ve tested every flavor of Solus. While the GNOME version places Solus on par with Zorin OS, the Xfce version is noticeably faster.

Advantage: Solus

My conclusion

Although Solus is a wonderful desktop operating system, Zorin OS edges it out thanks to its preinstalled software and aesthetics.

If you want the most user-friendly desktop Linux, go with Zorin OS. If you want a distribution that comes close but offers more customization and slightly better performance, go with Solus.





Source link

Leave a Reply

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Get our latest articles delivered straight to your inbox. No spam, we promise.

Recent Reviews


For the longest time, product liability was treated as something that only surfaced after a crisis. A claim would arrive, lawyers would step in, and the business would try to contain the damage. Today, however, the scale of product exposure makes liability a constant strategic factor.

As data from the National Safety Council shows, there were over 15 million consumer product-related injuries that received treatment in emergency departments in 2024. This represented an increase of 18.2% compared to 2023. Those numbers seem to keep going up and reflect how widely products are used and how quickly risk can spread across markets.

What this means for you, whether you run a small manufacturing firm or oversee a global brand, is that product liability is woven into daily operations. Ignoring it does not make it disappear. It only makes the eventual impact harder to manage and far more expensive than expected. Today, we’ll look at three reasons why you should be more prepared for it. 

#1. Digital Transparency Has Changed Litigation Risk

A decade ago, a defective product might generate scattered complaints that took months to connect. In 2026, this is no longer the case. Customers post photos, videos, and detailed accounts within hours of experiencing a problem. Those posts then circulate widely before a company’s internal reporting system even flags an anomaly.

This is why online reviews, discussion forums, and social platforms should often function as your informal early warning systems. Many plaintiffs’ firms monitor these channels closely to identify patterns and reach out to potential claimants at scale. 

Likewise, digital transparency also affects evidence. Emails, internal chats, testing records, and customer complaints are increasingly prone to leaks and can shape the narrative long before a case reaches trial. 

Besides, despite restrictions, jurors and regulators now operate in an environment where information spreads quickly, and reputational judgments form early. 

For your company, this means that product liability risk is directly tied to communication strategy. In other words, monitoring digital feedback, responding consistently, and documenting corrective actions are no longer optional public relations steps. 

#2. One Product Can Trigger Multi-Year, Multi-Hundred-Million Dollar Cascades

Modern litigation frequently consolidates claims into large coordinated proceedings. Multi-district litigation structures allow courts to centralize similar cases, which increases efficiency but also concentrates financial exposure. Once hundreds of plaintiffs are grouped, the pressure to resolve the matter intensifies. The Enfamil lawsuit situation shows exactly how this can happen.

As TorHoerman Law explains, Mead Johnson’s cow-milk-based formulas for premature infants appear to significantly increase the risk of necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC). This is a severe disease that’s often fatal, and many families allege that the warnings were inadequate.

As Top Class Actions reports, the NEC multi-district lawsuits have now reached a total of 950 claims. There have also been a wide range of settlement outcomes, ranging from $60 million for Enfamil to $495 million for Similac. When cases reach that scale, settlement decisions often involve complex calculations about public perception, ongoing defense costs, and long-term brand stability.

To make matters worse, competitors sometimes capitalize on uncertainty in the market, which can shift market share during prolonged litigation. Before you know it, a single product issue has the potential to evolve into a multi-year business challenge that affects operations.

#3. The Cost Structure of Liability Extends Beyond Settlements

Many executives focus on verdict amounts or settlement headlines, yet the financial consequences are often bigger than expected. As the Insurance Information Institute (III) reports, net premiums written for product liability insurance were over $4.5 billion in 2024. 

What’s more, product liability defense costs are extremely high compared to losses. In 2024, defense costs were $769 million or 33.6% of the losses incurred. Those defense costs represent resources spent simply to respond to claims, regardless of whether the company ultimately prevails.

In 2025, one manufacturer reported $374 million accrued for ‘probable product liability claims’ according to an annual report by the SEC. The same manufacturer also paid out $182.5 million and $227.1 million for probable insurance recoveries related to product liability accruals. 

It goes without saying that these accruals affect earnings projections, investor confidence, and borrowing capacity. Thus, if your reserves grow, you must account for them in strategic planning, which can invariably delay expansion and reshape long-term priorities.

Frequently Asked Questions 

1. Can a company be sued even if it followed all safety regulations?

Yes, it can. Meeting safety regulations helps your defense, but it does not automatically shield you from lawsuits. Plaintiffs can argue that a product was defectively designed or that warnings were inadequate, even if regulations were technically satisfied. Compliance is important, but courts often look beyond minimum standards.

2. What role does product recall play in reducing legal exposure?

A recall can limit harm and show that your company acted responsibly once a risk was identified. That can reduce the number of injuries and sometimes soften reputational damage. However, recalls do not erase liability for past harm, and they can sometimes attract more scrutiny if handled poorly.

3. Can strong warning labels fully protect a company from lawsuits?

Strong warnings help, but they are not a guarantee of protection. Courts examine whether the product was reasonably safe in its design, not just whether risks were disclosed. If a danger could have been reduced through a safer design, a warning alone may not be enough to avoid liability.

At the end of the day, when you look at rising injury data, escalating defense costs, and the scale of consolidated litigation, it becomes clear that product liability cannot be ignored. 

The consequence of doing so is reacting under pressure, with limited room to maneuver amidst mounting financial strain. What makes this especially challenging is that liability risk isn’t easily noticed. By the time it becomes visible in a courtroom, the operational and reputational effects may already be well underway.



Source link