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 466742
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
this review: not good
by crimperman on Fri 18th Mar 2011 13:53 UTC
Member since:

As others have said this review is poorly researched, poorly written and amounts to little more than an angry whine. As a review it contains little useful information for the reader and is more about what happened when the author tried to install Debian 6. Where are the tips on how he got around the issues or where he got the firmware for example? This is of no help to the reader at all.

Aside from that I suppose it makes sense that the author of such a poor piece of writing would declare one of the major "faults" as being that the proprietary firmware and drivers for his hardware were not supplied on CD1. Debian has always been about freedom. The project came under immense criticims for the inclusion of binary blobs in the stock kernel and supplying proprietary firmware in it's main repository. It addressed those concerns and moved them to the non-free repo. While it may be "convenient" to the user to supply them, Debian cannot do this while at the same time claiming to be a free distribution. Seriously if you want to have a distribution take all the decisions for you - install Mint.

Reply Score: 3