Respectfully huge disagree. Standard Fedora would be better (and is my personal recommendation) since a bunch of administrative command syntax would be different with Atomic. The internet’s going to show troubleshooting advice for the former 9 times out of 10.

They’re both terrible choices for a beginner - constant version churn every six months confuses newcomers, some initial brokenness after every new release - Fedora would be the last distro I’d install.

What would you suggest instead? Those initial roadbumps with major releases shouldn’t happen at all really, but I don’t personally see bi-annual version updates as a confusing thing since major companies are commonly shipping yearly version updates now.

Mint. They can stay on the same release for 5 years, if they desire, or upgrade every 2 if they want. Binary-only drivers are easily integrated, it has a polished experience, integrated backups, and anyone that has used Windows can navigate Cinnamon relatively easily.

Personally I can’t recommend Mint in good faith due to their heinously slow downstream update ‘schedule’ for apps they provide (and because Cinnamon feels half-baked still) but other than those issues Mint’s great.

You just described exactly why I would install an Atomic distribution.

So they can’t run something they don’t understand, and end up nuking their install.

The biggest differences in usage (dnf vs rpm-ostree) essentially function as a filter to prevent fuckups.

Everything I value is against “how long it will work without issue”, “how quick is an update”, and finally “how much effort do I need to help maintain it”.

Atomic systems have netted me positives on all my values. The people I know who used atomic, have only approached me due to edge cases such as specific laptop fan issues, which weren’t hindered by the atomic system.