Voice of the Masses: Should we recommend “advanced” distros to newbies?

That depends on the user.

I think it’s a pretty bad idea if your Dad asks you about an operating system to get him an Arch iso and wish him good luck. And since most Non-Linux-Users are no tech experts, I would not recommend them software that requires expert skills.
However, I can easily think of users that might prefer less beginner-friendly GNU/Linuxes to start with. Maybe an experienced app-developer changing from OS X (might like the more Unix-like approach of Slackware), a long-term Windows sysadmin (might like the flexibility of Arch or Debian) and so forth.

Short Answer: No
Long Answer: No way !
Best distro for newbies: The one that provides an out-of-the-box experience and/or with an easy to find (i.e. google it) information for the most common “problems”. In my view this falls into Mint or Ubuntu.
However, if you are going to install, maintain and resolve the problems, no recommendation is necessary. Just install the one you like best.

Not generally

if you know the person has some idea, ie is competent around other operating systems and are looking to learn possibly, but in general, no, never it will just put them off

Define Newbie? A Linux newbie or a computing newbie. If the user would have just as much trouble installing Windows as Linux then stick to a simple and complete distro like Mint or Ubuntu. Now if the person is experienced and a veteran users of Windows or OS X then perhaps an advanced distro would suit them better to learn the ins and outs of Linux. If they weren’t afraid to google solutions and potentially damage their current OS then they won’t be shy about doing the same with a distro like Arch.

It’s okay to let them use it, but you’d better be prepared to be their sysadmin.

It really depends on the person, their requirement (e.g. personal use, job credentials, or tinkering), and their learning style (e.g take it slowly or jump right in).

For me, my first experience was with Red Hat. It had a graphical interface, albeit the horrible Gnome 1.0. I quickly found that it tried to hide the internals. I jumped to Sorceror GNU/Linux because it gave me more control and used spells to cast and dispel packages. After that project ended, I noticed the devs moved to Gentoo and tried that. I, of course, did a stage 1 install because I wanted to learn about the system and how it worked. It failed the first time, but eventually I got it working. Sure compiling took a long time (X took almost a week on a pentium 75), but it was my computer for learning and trying out new things. If I had a system that just worked, I would have become bored quickly and I would probably be a BSD user now (just kidding).

I think it depends on the user. While I think it should be appropriate to demand a greater degree of technical literacy from from the so-called average person, as it stands most people are terrible with computers. I think for these people a beginner-friendly distro, such as Mint, is more appropriate. For people who are more comfortable with computers, and know how to find information on their own, it might very well be better to throw them in at the deep end.

I installed opensuse for my father that only browse, watch flash/html 5 videos and occational email and document writing with a connected printer he uses very seldom.
On a Lenovo Thinkpad opensuse 13.2 was perfectly installed. wlan, hibernation, suspend to disk worked straight out of the box. Had some small issues with the printer but less than on windows. Needed to extract the .ppd from the windows driver.
Earlier I used to get complains about how do I do that, it is so slow when it ran windows. Now He is very statisfied and have not aksed about any support. Apart from the printer this was all automatic.
I’ve never had it so easy with win7.

I think most people that have said it depends on the user have got it right.
Given you do not know exactly who is picking up the magazine, that makes it a little tricky. I would say a fair spread of distros would be the way forward. That way you can cover a range of distros for different people to choose from, (making the mag long-term interesting/valued rather than totally newbie centric as per a former magazine has become) just make sure there is a little box estimating a confidence level required (note not necessarily a skill level).
I for one would like to hear about Slackware in terms of installation and use rather than history (a link would do for this).

Every user, their hardware, computing needs and expectations differ. The ‘right’ distro needs to match these criteria.

I think the important thing to highlight to new users of Linux is that they do have choice, and if the distro they start with is not meeting their needs, then there are many other choices out there.

Take the time to become familiar with how Linux operates first. Keep your data in a separate ‘home’ partition, and when ready, try a different distro.

Most of us use Linux, at least in part, because of the freedom of choice that it offers; that includes hardware, software and operating system variances, and for some, licensing choices.

Any recommendation that most of us would give is almost certainly based on our biases, often with little regard to what the new Linux user is potentially capable of, or willing to try. Aside from that, many of us have found the distro we are most comfortable with and have minimal experience using other distros, further limiting any recommendations we might give; particularly if you are going to be the primary ‘support’ contact. As a result ‘our’ recommendation is likely to the one we use (or one from the same family), but that does not have to be, and quite possibly won’t be, the final distro of choice for the new user.

—-
Having taken a moment to read the Reddit article you reference, several things spring to mind…

They are an ‘experienced’ user, Windows since 1999, and they allude to being a power user, not just an Office user. Also, they were willing to ‘tinker’ with another OS (Linux, no less), so obviously someone with some willingness to ‘learn’. As an aside, there is no indication that they were recommended any of the earlier distros.

There is no explanation of the stability issues they encountered, but as @LagerMonster suggests, there is a good chance they were caused by hardware and as such kernel/driver related issues, especially dating back to 2007. Seven years later, probably with new hardware themselves, but definitely better kernel and drivers, it is no surprise that stability is less of an issue.

Finally, like most of us that have migrated away from Windows, they found the trigger that provided enough inertia to break through the ‘pain of change’. They have obviously been unhappy with Windows for a while, but it took Windows 8.x to provide enough motivation to commit to the change (some people take longer than others 😉 ). They also happened to chance upon a distro that obviously met their specific ‘needs’ (as listed above), so win-win. Welcome to the Linux community @SlackToTheFuture.

The vast majority of computer users just use computers to do things and the less technicalities get in the way the better. KISS,

I think it depends on the person, but overall no.

I think the best distro to recommend to someone coming off windows is something with a familiar environment for which support is readily and easily available. For that reason I recommend (and use) xubuntu. I think that a more traditional desktop environment like XFCE or LXDE is the best thing for newbies because it’s closest to what they’re familiar with. Having e.g ubuntu underpinning it means that support is very easy to find – all you have to do is explain that they’re running a version of ubuntu and that they can search for “ubuntu [problem]” to find the answer.

The question is sort of a problem itself. As people pointed out, what do you mean by newbie? Someone with good knowledge of windows but no experience in other OSes, someone with generally poor “computer skils”, someone really good at two or three application (word processing, presentations, excell, for example) but calling for an IT guy whenever something goes wrong with the underlying OS, or something else. The point is, it seems that what you’ve collected so far are answers to more than one (simple) question.

Most people I know don’t care about OS they are using, as long as there is software they use available and work in the way they are used to. In that sense it doesn’t really matter what distro you try to introduce them to. They simply don’t need all that technicality, they just want a computer that will let them finish the job at hand. They won’t bother installing the OS themselves and in many cases it would be waste of their time if learning about, or fiddling with OS would get in the way of them actually doing the job. So, in this case it is irrelevant which distro gets installed for them as long as the “productive software” is setup in the way it enables them to make swift transition. It is more important to showcase linux (as a generic notion) as a viable foundation for work environment (for example: MSOffice+SPSS > Libreoffice+SPSSLinux) than to insist on linux itself for the sake of it. In my experience people usually notice the advantage of linux as smooth experience after prolonged use.

On the other hand ‘newbies’ that like tinkering with their computers are curious enough to invest time in learning. I agree with people saying you should introduce them with the distro you use. I usually install Antergos, which I happily use for couple years now, or one of the Ubuntus, since I am reasonably familiar with both. And I agree with RocheLimit about giving new linux users a novel experience with different appearance to windows.

The main points, in my limited experience, to make about linux are: how fast they install, how much simpler installation is than in windows, how a complete reinstallation can be done in no time and no settings will be lost if your home folder is on a separate partition, how little issues with drivers I’ve had in the last couple years at least (I started with Mandrake 8 I think, still have the box with 9 CDs somewhere), compared to windows which gets more and more troublesome and dubious with drivers.

But again, are we talking about people who want to install their OS, or about people who want some software running but are not interested in what OS is installed?

How could I forget to mention 7) the Archwiki, the ace in the hole?

I am a firm believer in using the tools appropriate for the job, and being able to maintain ones tools to at least some level. For most users that would mean a Chromebook, or netbook with a simple distro and browser, word processor, media player and possibly a selection of time sink games. However if the individual wants to learn, and not just paddle in the shallow waters of computing as most do, then there is no reason not to give them more advanced tools, so long as comprehensive support is available.

Others have also made the point that how one defines “advanced” and “beginner” distros should be considered. From experience text and ncurses interfaces scare most users, which is perhaps a reflection on society’s declining literacy.

I wouldn’t call maintaining any windows machine a beginners task, most windows users call someone whenever their machine falls over, so providing support for most GUI based distros should theoretically be no more difficult, and with the right setup far easier. Letting a user with no previous experience loose with a text based interface would be pointless, as even those with “no experience” have had some contact with GUIs and will expect that as a minimum.

Usually, when I learn about something, I interest myself for complicated and intricate relationships etc. You may say that “I don’t like prettyfying things. I want it the hard way.”
The same is true for me in relation to computers. I use arch and try to find out lots of things myself.
I would recommend this approach for those who think they would enjoy it. I find it very useful and rewarding.
The first distro I installed was Raspbian on a Pi, then Linux Mint on a USB, from your CD. I did not use it often. I then paused for months. Then I thought about what I wanted to achieve: Learn computers, their intricacies and complexities, without hiding things that I could find (‘prettyfying’), and have customizable, modular, lightweight programs that allow me access to my computer, built by people who think in some ways similar to me, and around ideals I approve of.
I chose Arch GNU/Linux, an I am happy with it.
(I often choose not to be satisfied, to prevent myself from settling and growing comfortable with a situation that will change anyways, and to always learn=change=evolve myself. For simplicity, you may say I am satisfied with Arch.)
I suggest giving new people ideas they can follow according to their interests, not decide for them.