Would you recommend Debian to a brand new Linux user? Why/Why not?

[Bloom]

Debian has everything, want newer packages use sid or flatpaks, if there is a linux app in the wild, there's a .deb available to install

It's not necessary to go to Sid (Unstable!) of flatpaks/snaps if you want newer apps. Simply include the backports repository for Stable and you can get newer apps for Stable, too.

[Garthhh]

Good point
I usually include the info about newer stuff when recommending Debian
I don't bother with any of that, stable is fine with me

[Uptorn]

I quickly came to the conclusion that I might as well go full-on Debian with Cinnamon as DE.
IMHO still the best of both worlds.

I hadn't realized just how much of what makes Linux Mint Linux Mint is actually just the Cinnamon theme, until I recently configured a Mint look-alike installation. The default Cinnamon theme packaged with Debian's Cinnamon desktop doesn't do active window highlighting on the panel IIRC.

[oida]

Well, i am using Debian for yrs as a classic user. As a prof. Photoghrapher it was hard to make the change from Windows tools to Linux, i.e. Darktable , Gimp, Scribus and Inkscape. Well, i had experience in Networks and so i mastered the switch from Win to Debian 10/11/12.

But for example, my brother is a really "soft user" and i recommended Mint with Cinnamon, simply because it's more simply to use and make things easier with the graphic UI.

Conclusion: While i really love the stability of Debian, i am very annoyed from Gnome, cause their philosophy is, from my point of view, to restrictive. To much resource eating addons needed like DashToDock usw. , and some of the addons are not really compatible with others. It's hard to explain to a new user why really simple things are not included and others, for example handling USB Sticks are sometimes tricky. Also in my opinion a "new" Linux user doesn't want to dive deep into the OS or work from a terminal, so these probably is a deterrent effect.

[juribel]

I simply cannot understand in any way why this fat and ugly thing "Gnome" is always recommended as "the" standard. For me, it turns out to be the most annoying and most unusuable of all. Again and again I personally do recommend Debian with Xfce, installed from the Live ISO. There is hardly any DE easier to install, to use and to customize. No surprises. I have a 28" 4K monitor, lots of display space, so a DE which has developed more and more into a tablet or smartphone DE is really out of place here.

Just my personal view, not meant to offend any Gnome users. May they be happy with it and thanks to Linux for giving us the choice

[pwzhangzz]

this fat and ugly thing "Gnome"

The difference between calling Gnome essentially a stupid idiot and regularly using Gnome with great admiration, is actually only two cp commands away (i.e., copying the .config/dconf folder and the .local/share/gnome-shell/extensions folder from an experience Gnome user).

"Gnome" turns out to be the most annoying and most unusuable of all

I 100% agree when you use the "official" live usb. Unfortunately this is how the great majority of Linux users got their first impression on Gnome. It would be a totally different experience if you can get hold of a remasterized live usb from an experienced Gnome user. Corporate users don't get the chance to install their Linux/Gnome, thus they are immune from suffering this horrible experience.

That said, those cone-headed cone-haired (Dilbert's boss, who I believe is the embedded spy from Ebonia) Gnome big shots do have a history of betraying their users. Gnome 3 was so utterly unusable and unmenable that most of its users including myself were forced to switch to Mate. However, things have mellowed quite a bit now and, at the same time, we have become more seasoned, and more adapted to handle the unforeseeable.

[sdibaja]

Good summary of the Gnome issues.
I too use Mate, and am very satisfied.
...
Back on the recommendation thing:
First, very few noobs to Linux have any experience in installing any kind of operating system... So I don't advertise they start learning until they are well versed in backing up their data and installing their existing system from scratch.
..... however
Years ago I set up a laptop for my wife with Debian Mate, configured it to make launching her apps super easy (one click). She was a former Windows user, but adapted rapidly and was thankful for the simplicity and speed.
Also, meanwhile I have installed similar for about a dozen other users, all successful.
....
Summary: know the user.
Protect Their irreplaceable Data!
Do Not recommend any huge learning curve.

EDIT: yes I do recommend Debian over "the others"
I feel they should enlist the help of someone more experienced for
the initial install,
Backup,
and configuration of their most desired apps.

[juribel]

Not very amusing that it takes "a remasterized live usb from an experienced Gnome user" to make Gnome usable. Xfce and similar DEs (I personally don't know Mate and siblings, but I will assume) are very predictable and usable out of the box and won't surprise you with any unexpected behaviour. Just like Gnome 2 was.

Maybe I wrote this before... my brother (75) had used macOS since it's very beginning. A year ago, his Macbook broke irrecoveribly. He bought a new affordable laptop, got Windows replaced by Xubuntu (unfortunately I was a Xubuntu user at that time myself before I switched to Debian 12). Of course it took him some time to establish new habits, but the learning curve was very moderate and he could do his work.

As for backup, I agree that backing up and restoring always should be the first thing to learn when starting to use computers or an unknown OS. Here comes my second point of annoyance: Why for heaven's sake is this DejaDup thing always recommended as a backup tool? It shreds your data and you need exactly the same version of the tool installed to restore. Both is absolutely no-go when it comes to backup and restore. A real backup may never mess around with your file content and structure, and restoring files has to be possible without any tools except the cp command or the file manager. But I am getting off-topic now...

[nexdev]

Hey,
I have been using Debian as a distro in my WSL2 setup.
I had really tough time to set up my android studio for a app development project and had to use windows eventually to get started with the project.

Well, not only studio, there is certainly a positive side over using Debian distro as the person who is using it would learn a lot regarding the shell and scripts (only if he is interested and wants to know more about shell and commands).

All other reasons, I personally feel it is better to use Ubuntu and Linux mint if you are new to distros and shell scripts as they are more user-friendly and also have better pkg managers.

Thanks!!

[DebianFox]

I would recommend Ubuntu/MX Linux/Mint first. See how it goes and then transition to Debian. Glide their path.

[juribel]

Why should one? Especially Ubuntu has nothing user friendly anymore. It urges users to use their proprietary snap. It feels like half of the questions in the German Ubuntu forum are about programs not working anymore. If somebody is not sure what to take, simply install Debian in a Virtual Machine without affecting the main OS, or try a Debian Live system. What to take is more a question about the desktop environment one choses. Ubuntu is a deriative of Debian, Mint us a deriative of Ubuntu. That makes no sense.

[DebianFox]

Well first of all most of the people who are coming into Linux are coming either from Windows or Mac ecosystem. For them Ubuntu or MX Linux or Mint is preferred as it gives a better and easier path. We have to look at it from the perspective of people who have zero exposure to Linux/Unix.
Secondly if the ask is to go Debian only, due to some reservations about Ubunutu, then MX Linux or even LMDE is better. Even Zorin OS can be considered.

But Debian for a newbie at this moment of time no. Once someone has spent time and wants to step up to the next level then Debian.

[juribel]

Please explain, what is it then that makes MX or LMDE better for beginners? I don't quite see the point. Isn't it the DE in the first place that makes it?

MX comes with Xfce which is a very good choice but on the other hand it has tons of confusing and unnecessary extra tools (just my opinion). LMDE is Debian with a Gnome 2 fork as DE (correct?) and some extra tools. So why make detours instead of using Debian? Provided not using Gnome as a DE but rather Xfce instead.

I possibly mentioned before that never before I saw a Linux system being more easily installed and handled than Debian bookworm using the Live ISO with Xfce and Calamares installer.

[Aristocat]

Please explain, what is it then that makes MX or LMDE better for beginners? I don't quite see the point. Isn't it the DE in the first place that makes it?

MX comes with Xfce which is a very good choice but on the other hand it has tons of confusing and unnecessary extra tools (just my opinion). LMDE is Debian with a Gnome 2 fork as DE (correct?) and some extra tools. So why make detours instead of using Debian? Provided not using Gnome as a DE but rather Xfce instead.

I possibly mentioned before that never before I saw a Linux system being more easily installed and handled than Debian bookworm using the Live ISO with Xfce and Calamares installer.

I personally use LMDE for my main production machine and just like the Cinnamon experience. Although LM is aimed at "beginners", I just need something that works and can handle my way through a terminal. Why not get the latest Cinnamon & Mint development while we're at it versus vanilla Debian Cinnamon?

[Garthhh]

MX is better for people who want to tinker, which some windows refugees want, you have a choice of DEs

Mint of any sort has that ubun taint on it, I wouldn't recommend

Spiral Linux on Bookworm with whatever DE just works & connects to the Debian repo, not some smaller community repo

I use KDE & Discover to update, incredibly user friendly & stable
Stick with the suite of programs from Gnome or KDE for the best integration & experience