Linked by Dedoimedo on Thu 17th Mar 2011 23:17 UTC
Debian and its clones Writing about Debian is not a simple thing. You know it's the giant that has spawned pretty much every other distro out there. It's almost like a Roman Empire, almost a taboo. Furthermore, it's not a desktop distro per se. It's more sort of a template you use to build your platform. It's also a SOHO server distro, therefore it more fits into the business category, comparable to CentOS and similar.
Thread beginning with comment 466649
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Reality
by Morgan on Fri 18th Mar 2011 03:22 UTC in reply to "Reality"
Morgan
Member since:
2005-06-29

If you want a "Wizard" that does everything for you - pay the money for Windows and do it "their way".

Or a Mac, with the added benefit of a BSD backend.

If you want to 'dabble" with Linux but still go with generic installs, install Ubuntu.

Seconded.

If you want a stable, powerful OS run Debian and do it "your way".

This is where I say Slackware or Arch instead of Debian. Not because Debian isn't stable or powerful; indeed it can be both. However, I think in their dual quest to be both the purest and the most versatile distro they have reached a point where they are blind to that third necessity: Installable by a newbie. Even the comparably archaic Slackware installer is easy and painless enough for newbies provided they pay attention, and it's about as intimate as you're going to get with your hardware when running a Linux based OS. Slack and Arch are the epitome of doing it "your way".

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Reality
by nt_jerkface on Fri 18th Mar 2011 03:53 in reply to "RE: Reality"
nt_jerkface Member since:
2009-08-26

However, I think in their dual quest to be both the purest and the most versatile distro they have reached a point where they are blind to that third necessity: Installable by a newbie.


Why is that a necessity? Is there a Linux desktop movement standards committee?

My opinion of Debian is that it is ran by some of the looniest GPL loons (iceweasel???) but they have never tried pushing a fake image on me. Like Slackware they aren't claiming to be ready for Grandma's desktop so I don't see why anyone would complain about their distro not being user friendly.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Reality
by Morgan on Fri 18th Mar 2011 03:57 in reply to "RE[2]: Reality"
Morgan Member since:
2005-06-29

Maybe I've just done so many Slack installs over the years that I find it to be the easiest installation out there. I feel that Debian should live up to that standard.

I honestly have nothing against Debian in general, and in fact used it for both servers and workstations for many years without issue. It's this current release that I find extremely lacking compared to past releases.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Reality
by phoenix on Fri 18th Mar 2011 17:38 in reply to "RE[2]: Reality"
phoenix Member since:
2005-07-11

My opinion of Debian is that it is ran by some of the looniest GPL loons (iceweasel???)


The Icedove, Iceweasel, Iceape naming scheme has *absolutely* NOTHING to do with the GPL.

Debian devs added patches to the Firefox, Thunderbird, etc code. They sent the patches to Mozilla. Mozilla decided not to add them to the source tree. Debian devs kept the patches to their sources, thus making their Firefox/Thunderbird/etc packages different from the binaries shipped by Mozilla. Since they are different, they are not allowed to use the Firefox/Thunderbird/etc names.

It's a trademark issue, nothing else.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: Reality
by Ragpickr on Fri 18th Mar 2011 09:04 in reply to "RE: Reality"
Ragpickr Member since:
2011-03-18

Nonsense! Even Ubuntu does not support all the wireless drivers by default and asks the user to install windows driver! Ubuntu does not ask you to make your "root" password and after installation creates problem by seeking administrator's/authentication password if you wish to install any software or visit a partition which was not mounted by default. I am not blaming Ubuntu. In fact to use any OS, ONE HAS TO HAVE A LITTLE PATIENCE TO GET FAMILIAR WITH ITS ENVIRONMENT AND TRY TO LEARN THINGS TO DO WHAT YOU WISH TO DO. Thank you.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: Reality
by Morgan on Fri 18th Mar 2011 15:33 in reply to "RE[2]: Reality"
Morgan Member since:
2005-06-29

Please show me where in my post I claimed Ubuntu supported all wireless cards without issues. I'll make it easy: I made no such claim, nor would I. Piss off.

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE[2]: Reality
by marcus0263 on Sat 19th Mar 2011 00:40 in reply to "RE: Reality"
marcus0263 Member since:
2007-06-02

Slack is a good distro and with all Linux distro's it really comes down to the package manager. On my web servers I use Gentoo, it's best IMO for running on a VPS due to it's ability to really customize. Apt and Portage IMO are the best package managers. I simply loath RPM's and Slacks slapt falls short. Apt and Portage are simply outstanding for resolving/maintaining depdencies

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: Reality
by Morgan on Sat 19th Mar 2011 04:22 in reply to "RE[2]: Reality"
Morgan Member since:
2005-06-29

I'm a big fan of both Apt and Portage too. However, I find that on Slackware I prefer to roll my own packages either from original source code (./configure; make; make install) or at times using Slackbuilds to make my own reinstallable packages. Either way I can customize the install if necessary, which gives me a level of control far beyond a traditional package manager. Granted, I've rarely done that kind of thing, but the option is there and I like it.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Reality - mac
by jabbotts on Mon 21st Mar 2011 19:47 in reply to "RE: Reality"
jabbotts Member since:
2007-09-06

sure, OsX has the BSD back end.. shame about all that Apple front end making swiss cheese of the security potentially offered by BSD.

http://www.h-online.com/security/features/Hackers-versus-Apple-1202...

Reply Parent Score: 2