The best and the most stable? here are my needs and my problems, I trust in you
 

hello guys, nice to meet you!
I registered on this forum with the hope and awareness to find a lot of people prepared to Linux!
I use Linux for some time, a few years ago I started with Ubuntu.
over time affinai my needs and I knew I was close ubuntu, and that Unity was not the best interface!
I have some problems:
some distributions (including Chakra, SUSE and now Manjaro) when I lower the screen of my laptop and the rise after a short time, everything hangs on the unlock screen (where you have to put the password to re-open the current session)!
I can not understand why, can be a problem with KDE?

Now let's go, I'm using Manjaro and I feel good about him ..before I used Antergos even if I wanted to install Arch but I do not think will be able to perform all of the steps being fully aware of what I'm doing and make a copy and paste from the web without understanding I do not think has much sense!

But now, for the university'm inziando to plan and need absolute stability!
Arch as you know is not stable since the Rolling Release and I need it. I need to create my own workspace on your PC!

I have a terrible doubt, if KDE is buggy as use as an interface? I do not like Unity, Gnome Mate is not too much and too skinny! I would like a customizable interface such as KDE but stable, very stable!

Pacman package manager is great and I think it's the best one out there (not you?), it will be difficult to change!

which distro do you recommend, dop reading my criteria?
I used Fedora, openSUSE, Linux Mint, Ubuntu, UbuntuGnome, Kubuntu, Antergos, Manjaro, Chakra, Kali (a long time ago and do not remember much) and BackTrack!

PS: My BIOS does not tell me if I am in the UEFI (no option) or not but when I open a new Distro goes to UEFI, you can be the problem here? THE PC is two-three years ago

My Laptop:

i7 3th gen
8 GB RAM DDR3
500 HDD
2 GB video board GDDR3
Display FHD

I'd try Slackware

Seems like you've tried a few distros, you have some preferences, perhaps also consider Linux From Scratch

I also recommend Slackware. Probably the most stable you will find.

+1 Slackware
Loved by few.
Feared by many.
Respected by All.

once you slack you never go back
SLACKWARE!!! slackware!!! slackware!!!

Slackware is a good choice, as is Debian, which I now prefer.
You may like to try AntiX, a live/installable Debian derivative, I have been using it for some years now.
http://antix.mepis.org/index.php?title=Main_Page

Guys, i tried now cinnamon and i love it!
Slackware is not well optimized forse cinnamon right?

Slackware comes with six desktop environments/window managers out of the box (KDE, XFCE, Fluxbox, Blackbox, TWM, and WindowMaker), but Cinnamon is not one of them. There is no slackbuild for Cinnamon at Slackbuilds.org, but you could compile it.

Debian, which is also rock-solid stable, does have Cinnamon in its repos.

If you are looking for stability, my opinion is that Slackware and Debian are the two best choices. CentOS, which is based on RHEL and is designed primarily to be a server OS, is likely number three.

Debian
 

With reference to +frankbell comment above:
There are distros (including core Debian) based upon Debian stable that are rock solid! Recommended, esp for server work. This is the best choice for stability, but may lack software with newer features. Somewhat analogous to RHEL or CentOS, very conservative.

There are distros (including Debian workstation) based upon Debian Testing that are more current and exciting, but a little less stable. This is somewhat more like Fedora, Ubuntu LTS, Mint, and the level most people want for laptops.

There are some VERY exciting distros based upon Debian Sid (unstable: exampled VSIDO and APTOSID) that many people swear by (and sometimes at) that are recommended, but only for those who know how to back out updates and troubleshoot breakage. These tend to blow up from time to time. This is on the cutting edge, which is wonderful but may involve some bleeding.

For your stated purpose (stability) there are some excellent options: Arch, Debian Stable, Slack, CentOS are all good and free. If you are not tied to Linux, there is even FreeBSD. If you want commercial, add RHEL and SUSE. If you are willing to trade some stability for features, there are HUGH number of options.

You have entered a target-rich environment! Good hunting!

mmm but i hate apt! and people say Arch is not raccomanded for people who wants stability!
Slackware is very complicated to so simple things as install sw, right?

I believe Cinnamon is a Linux Mint desktop. Not sure if any other distros have it available.

I love apt, but I'm also more familiar with it than other package managers. I run Debian unstable. It's still pretty stable IMO. I don't run blind dist-upgrades though. I had tried Arch pre-systemd, and I liked the BSD-init style, but not so much pacman. Gentoo is nice, if you have time to watch everything compile.

Slackware does not support cinnamon, but it is available in third party repositories.

This is not true.
Why do you think this? Have you tried it?

I don't think this is so bad:

I guess you could try Debian, it has packages for pretty much everything. However, it is harder to install than Slackware, IMO. Slackware just gets a bad reputation. It's actually the easiest and fastest to install IMO. If you want difficult and lengthy installs go to Debian, Gentoo, Fedora, etc.

But,. Debian, Fedora install and Slackware install follow the same pattern, there isn't much difference aside from graphics.

Debian
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FnVGEIl8X7E

Slackware
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FnVGEIl8X7E

Fedora
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2jvDYayQaMo

Now, Gentoo, that is an installation. That can take days because of compilation time. I'm not sure I see the point of using Gentoo anymore. In the 'old days' you could gain a lot of performance from compiling from source for your particular architecture and setup,. but these days,. i'd say it would be hard to see any performance difference between custom compiled software and binary packages.

It is as easy to install as many other distros. I'm not sure it has a bad reputation from anyone who has tried it; maybe the "name" makes the uninformed suspect of it. I dunno, hadn't really noticed that it had a bad rep, in fact it's been so much used and commented on in the forums, that's what caused me to try it out myself. And I'm what you'd call a slow adopter.