Re: Debian: A noob query
2011/11/24 Sam Vagni <sam.vagni@gmail.com>:
> On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 7:06 AM, Andrew Wood <a.j.w@me.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Sam
>
> Hello.
>
>> I would whole heartedly recommend Debian. The problem with the other distros
>> like Ubuntu, Fedora etc that try to be on the bleeding edge is that they
>> tend to be buggy (and often slower) and each time a new release come out
>> upgrading tends to break everything, and becasue they work on such a short
>> life cycle (6 months between releases no matter what) you have to keep
>> upgrading to get the latest security fixes etc but the 6 monthly deadline
>> means stuff gets released before its ready. Theyre great distros for
>> developers who want to test out the latest technology but theyre not suited
>> for desktop 'everyday' use even though unfortunatly thats how they market
>> them, and I think Linux's reputation as a whole suffers as a result.
>
> Yeah, I think you are right, they are unstable and each time a newer
> version comes before anyone is addicted with the older one.
>
Many ppl are using Debian only for its stability (testing is quite
stable (though from time to time (quite rarely) something does break),
and I didn't have many problems with unstable (only one, and I found
workaround for it)
>> Debian is a rock solid distro, after many years of using Linux on servers
>> and the desktop and trying (and getting frustrated by) Fedora, Ubuntu &
>> Linux Mint I've settled on Debian and found it to be pure quality.
>
> Debian - yeas I heard of its rock solid stability! But I have not
> heard of newbies using it, seems typical for them, so as a newbie
> would it not be that difficult...? I am after all not a geek user!
>
I started with Debian :) and the first thing I did was dist-upgrade to
testing (Lenny times, testing had working drivers for my Atheros wifi
card), which broke my system (udev + kernel change), but as I
experimented with udev and kernel upgrade sequence (first had to
upgrade udev, restart, then kernel, then restart and boot with newer
kernel) I upgraded it to testing. Then I dist-upgraded to unstable and
was using it up to hdd failure (about 6 months, some hardware problem
caused loss of partition table, didn't know that I could recover from
that)
Point is: trying to repair stuff when it breaks is the best way to
learn its ins and outs, though that demands some patience from person.
>> Ive not had any problems with hardware compatability (unlike Linux Mint &
>> Fedora which Ive had headaches with to do with graphics) and as for not
>> having the latest technology, its not that out of date, and what would you
>> rather have - the absolute latest version which no one has tested (you're
>> the tester!) or a version slightly behind the cutting edge which has been
>> tried, tested and fixed?
>
> Yeah, the great thing with Debian might be that it is stable and bug
> free, so that's what the best part I guess.
>
Every complex software has bugs, though Debian is relatively stable
(when comparing to avionic software, Debian oldstable has too many
stability issues to even compare ;P (but with such comparison almost
everything else is unusable)), and you will learn how (relatively) bug
free system can be (so you will not put up with things full of bugs)
>[snip]
>> you might need to manually install the fimware packages for some of your
>> hardware with Debian (its not installed by default) which you dont need to
>> do with other distros but its not difficult and the end result is worth it.
>
> Lastly, I am confused, if using Debian and installing software is easy
> or tough for noobs?
>
> Thanks.
I believe installing apps on Debian, through either GUI or CLI
(provided they know the name of app manager), is not hard (easier than
in Windows, IMHO)
darkestkhan
------------------------------------------
Feel free to CC me.
jid: darkestkhan@gmail.com
May The Source be with You.
Reply to: