Re: Is Squeeze right for me?
John Jason Jordan wrote:
I have several years of experience with Ubuntu, but I have never looked
inside. I'm just a pointy-clicky desktop user. How things work has
never been of interest to me except when they don't work. Even then I
just learn enough to fix the problem and go back to living.
Nothing wrong with that. Some like to tinker, some like to build from
scratch, some just like to use a computer as a tool in the course of
their living or have to in the work place.
However, several Linux friends have suggested it's time for me to move
on.
If Ubuntu works for you, then it doesn't really matter what distro you
use. Unless you are after "geek points" ? Being "cool" is not about the
computer OS you use - it comes from the kind of person you *are*.
According to the advice I receive I no longer need the Ubuntu
training wheels and I would be better served by going to a less
newbie-oriented distro. Perhaps they are right, but I grew up with
Synaptic and .deb files, and I really don't want to leave the Debian
world. Therefore, this morning I installed testing on a new hard disk,
leaving my old Ubuntu hard disk untouched so I can always go back to it.
I assume you physically removed the Ubuntu HD from the machine and that
the new HD you used to install Deb on is in good working order?
Having spent just a day in testing I am not happy with the quantity of
bugs.
No offence, but are these "bugs" in the sense of problems with the
software or might there be some PEBKAC going on?
Yes, I know it is called "testing" for a reason. And I am happy
to do my part to help fix problems. Yet I need a computer that I can
use for real work. But at the same time I want the latest and greatest.
Latest & greatest aren't really the best for work conditions - at least
if it is work that has some value for you (e.g. a source of income,
etc.). Latest & greatest software can & does break regularly, can have
any number of vulnerabilities and might be exploitable. Latest &
greatest software obviously has its place, but running latest & greatest
on a production system is *not* good computing practice. The decision
you probably should be considering is your breakage tolerance, the
reliability of your back-up routine, your security know-how, and how
much time you have available to restore and repair breakages. You would
be better off with having software that has been thoroughly break and
security tested, which is "stable" (or Lenny) in Debian world. Latest &
greatest are in sid or "experimental". But there are times when those
can have high overheads, and it is assumed that you know how to maintain
your own system when running something like that. Despite what modern
advertising might tell you, patience really is still a virtue. The
decision you should be looking to make at this point in time is what
your *need* is and what your *want* is and decide where your values
lie. Novelty does not necessarily mean better.
I need OOo 3.1
I run testing/ "Squeeze" and have OOo3.1.1
and Scribus 1.3.5.1
On
http://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=scribus&searchon=names&suite=testing§ion=all
you'll see that Scribus is 1.3.3.13dfsg~svn20081228-2 How critical is
the difference? Was there a new feature in 1.3.5.1 that you *need* or
is this simply a mad pursuit for novelty to keep up with friends?
and the most recent versions of
several other apps that I live in all day long.
Ditto the above?
The stable versions of
Debian are not sufficiently cutting edge for me. Or have I
misunderstood that?
"Cutting edge"? The question that you might want to consider asking is
less about "cutting edge" and more about whether the system is stable
and reliable, responsive given your hardware array, does it satisfy your
user-based needs? Stable is definitely "tried and tested" and nothing
except for the occasional security patches will be added to the code
base for Lenny. As a consequence, it is software that will work
reliably and as expected. If you want higher degrees of churn, which
will require you to spend a lot more time "under the hood", then try sid
or to be "uber cool" out-fox your buddies and give sidux a run for its
money. Nice and speedy distro, with all of the latest gizmos, but is
likely to require increased maintenance overhead from yourself. It's
all a question of how much you are prepared to give of your time and how
much you want to take without any effort on your part.
The local Linux friends who thought I should move on from Ubuntu
suggested testing as the closest in the Debian world to the Ubuntu way
of doing things. After today I am thinking they were wrong.
They might be right or wrong, depending on how you answered the
questions I raised above and those asked of you by others responding to
your query. Again, let me re-emphasise that using a computer is
something that you yourself do. When you are by yourself with your
computer it is pointless trying to keep up with them when you are
tearing your hair out at endless problems and text filled screens and
lost data/ crashed apps. Fixing a critically wrong system at a time
when even the hacker world has gone to sleep is a very lonely and
frustrating place to be, trust me.
I need advice.
It all depends on exactly *what* you *want* to hear as to whether or not
you consider it advice; however, I would suggest that you go back to
basics: what do you want a computer for and does Ubuntu currently
satisfy that need?
If the *only* reason that you are looking to change distros is to fit in
with what your friends expect of you, then (no offence!) you really do
have a different set of questions that you would probably benefit in the
long term from asking, rather than the specific set you are asking here,
and these are more likely to concern you yourself and your relationships
than a computer system.
Good luck in making your *own* mind up. Perhaps you might consider
asking a different query on the Ubuntu list, such as "How can I defend
my preference for Ubuntu against increasing peer pressure to change?"
and then stick to your guns once you've figure out what *you* want.
Reply to: