Sell me on Debian

Message

runequester · #1 Post by **runequester** » 2006-07-08 02:16

So Im currently using Ubuntu, and am pretty comfortable with it, as well as having played around a bit with Knoppix. But I want to try something new, without being too far from what I know so far. So Debian seems an obvious solution.

What will Debian give me, that Ubuntu doesn't ?
Whats different ?

Cheers good folk!
Ivan

DeanLinkous · #2 Post by **DeanLinkous** » 2006-07-08 03:52

less brown

more choices!

Lavene · #3 Post by **Lavene** » 2006-07-08 03:58

Debian doesen't have one man with a shitload of money calling the shots!
(Funny how that aplies to another well know OS too...)

Tina

polemicz · #4 Post by **polemicz** » 2006-07-08 04:38

Whenever I've tried Ubuntu/Kubuntu sudo has driven me nuts. I know it's irrational and I can set up a root user, but I want it from the get go. Then there is also the fact that I feel clean when I use Debian (currently Etch). Then also there's nothing I find in Ubuntu that isn't in Debian.

runequester · #5 Post by **runequester** » 2006-07-08 04:43

so debian has a separate root login, or how does that work ?

I must admit, I rather like sudo..

Lavene · #6 Post by **Lavene** » 2006-07-08 07:12

runequester wrote:so debian has a separate root login, or how does that work ?

I must admit, I rather like sudo..

Initially Debain has a separate root account, but it's no problem setting up sudo and use that instead...

Tina

jjmac · #7 Post by **jjmac** » 2006-07-08 10:18

runequester's thread title
>>
Sell me on Debian
>>

You mean, tell me all about it. So then people try to figure where your at, then you read responses. Bits that don't make sense, you respond with "yes, well, what does that mean"

Why not sell it to your self instead, the dload is free. www.debian.org has lots of docs.

I don't mean any offence there, but it is dry, i know ....

I'd rather just give it away

jm

Penguin Skinner · #8 Post by **Penguin Skinner** » 2006-07-08 19:24

jjmac wrote:Why not sell it to your self instead....

Exactly what I was going to suggest.

FWIW, I had Ubuntu installed briefly a while back just to see if they were doing anything clever. Underneath the hood, it's Debian, and IMO much of what they've added is either needless, or even counterproductive. Ubuntu's nonsensical approach to security (e.g. root login not enabled by default, yet no firewall) doesn't impress me, nor do I care for Gnome -- especially Gnome with that ugly brown theme and the jungle drums.

Kubuntu is somewhat better, and I say that not simply because I much prefer KDE. Kubuntu gives you a pretty lean, mean installation, and with a little work, you can clean it up so that it's pretty much Debian. The proprietary GUI package manager, called Adept ('Inept' strikes me as more appropriate) is a clunk compared to Synaptic, and there was some proprietary info center or similar that struck me as being just too Windows-like.

But there is one advantage I know of with Ubuntu/Kubuntu in some cases: easier installation on some machines, particularly Dell and some other brands/models of laptops, apparently due to different hardware detection routines.

I suppose it's fair to point out, too, that like many others it seems, after running BSD and several other Linux distros without being completely satisfied, I finally installed Debian in August, 2005, and haven't looked back since. Ubuntu/Kubuntu, IMO, are little more than just Debian installers.

bhagabhi · #9 Post by **bhagabhi** » 2006-07-08 21:40

runequester wrote: What will Debian give me, that Ubuntu doesn't ?
Whats different ?

stability.

Jason W · #10 Post by **Jason W** » 2006-07-10 05:15

Whatever Linux you come from, use Debian for a while, and it will sell itself. I was used to the simplicity of Slackware, and had trouble installing Debian for the first time about a year ago. I was on vacation in Panama City the first week of June last year and was tracking the release of Sarge carefully over the hotel public PC, wondering what this Debian thing and it's 15,000+ packages was all about. We left back for Georgia before Sarge was official, though, but only by a day or so. (Though I did witness the release of Debian 3.0r6 as well as erosion of the sand on the beaches while I was there). I even tried to install Sarge later that week, but my mouse wouldn't work with Lbreakout2. Come to find out I had bad hardware - it never happened again in any future installs. But in the meantime I stuck with trusty old Slackware.
After using Knoppix for about a month last winter, and after being impressed with it's performance, I was going to install Debian and learn to use it. And it was a learning curve. But I downloaded all the Woody CD's - 7 of them - and Sarge 3.1r1 - all 14 of them - and I have never looked back. I use Woody for my server and router, and Sarge or Testing for my desktops and I couldn't be happier Linux-wise. If I get a wild hair and want to compile some programs, there is nothing stopping me. But I can also have the latest programs ( by running "testing") without having to compile each and every thing I add to my system, and that is nice.
After using SuSE, Slackware, Red Hat and Debian, I find Debian to be the one that can be the most things to the most people while being able to fill any niche without compromising it's intended purpose.

Lavene · #11 Post by **Lavene** » 2006-07-10 05:53

Jason W wrote: I use Woody for my server and router,

Are you aware that Woody is no longer recieving security updates?
http://www.debian.org/News/2006/20060601

Just want to mention it

Tina

newmarket · #12 Post by **newmarket** » 2006-07-10 06:23

Penguin Skinner wrote:
jjmac wrote:.
especially Gnome with that ugly brown theme and the jungle drums.

I agree about the color scheme, but I kind ok like the drums.

jjmac · #13 Post by **jjmac** » 2006-07-11 01:09

Howdy,

newmarket wrote:
Penguin Skinner wrote:
jjmac wrote:.
especially Gnome with that ugly brown theme and the jungle drums.

I agree about the color scheme, but I kind ok like the drums.

That looks like the quote is mine ... it's not

. Just thought i'd make that clear

jm

thorhr · #14 Post by **thorhr** » 2006-07-13 02:20

I started using Linux in 2002 because I bought a computer with ms me installed on it that is what drove me to Linux. The first distro that i tried was Linspire it is a very good os. It is based on Debian and after awhile I thought why should I use based on, why not use the real thing.Then I installed Debian but at first i could not get the gui to work but then they came out with a new installer and everything was easy.
I have tried Redhat,SUSE,Xandros,MEPIS,Fedora,Ubuntu andSlackware. I think that Debian, Linspire and MEPIS are the best with Debian being #1.Like I said before why use based on when you can use #1
Thor

chestnut1969 · #15 Post by **chestnut1969** » 2006-07-16 21:48

I have just moved back from Ubuntu to Debian

Takes a little bit more configuring wise, but I now have a much faster, slim line system than with Ubuntu without all the bloat and brown

[Debian SID net install, to enable me to install base system, and select the packages that I want installed]

Cheers

Taki · #16 Post by **Taki** » 2006-07-18 12:36

chestnut1969 wrote:I have just moved back from Ubuntu to Debian

I'm in exactly the same boat. While Ubuntu's certainly easier to install, I find that I learn a lot more with Debian, which is a big thing for me. I'd recommend though that you use something like VMWare Server to experiment with the installation before putting it into production, because it can be quite creepy with all the options and other scary things it puts in front of you.

ajdlinux · #17 Post by **ajdlinux** » 2006-07-19 05:06

Penguin Skinner wrote:The proprietary GUI package manager, called Adept ('Inept' strikes me as more appropriate) is a clunk compared to Synaptic, and there was some proprietary info center or similar that struck me as being just too Windows-like.

They aren't proprietary, adept has recently been added to Debian.

Lavene · #18 Post by **Lavene** » 2006-07-19 07:12

ajdlinux wrote:
Penguin Skinner wrote:The proprietary GUI package manager, called Adept ('Inept' strikes me as more appropriate) is a clunk compared to Synaptic, and there was some proprietary info center or similar that struck me as being just too Windows-like.
They aren't proprietary, adept has recently been added to Debian.

Adept is licensed under the BSD license. So it's not proprietary by default but it does not carry, among other things, the requirement of providing source code when modified and redistributed like the GPL does.

The BSD license is short and sweet but wether it provide freedom or limitations is an ongoing debate in the free software/ open source movements.

The Ubuntu policy does not demand all software to be licensed under the GPL. It does however require the software to be 'free' which usually means the GPL or BSD. They also require that the source code is available for all software maintained by the Ubuntu developers (of course).

So the default Ubuntu installation does not have proprietary software in it, but just as debian they make non-free software available through optional repositories.

Tina

PS: But I agree... Adept leaves alot to be desired.

Debian User Forums

Sell me on Debian

Sell me on Debian

Re: Sell me on Debian

Why Debian