I distro hopped for a bit before finally settling in Debian (because Debian was always mentioned as a distro good for servers, or stable machines that are ok with outdated software)

And while I get that Debian does have software that isn’t as up to date, I’ve never felt that the software was that outdated. Before landing on Debian, I always ran into small hiccups that caused me issues as a new Linux user - but when I finally switched over to Debian, everything just worked! Especially now with Debian 13.

So my question is: why does Debian always get dismissed as inferior for everyday drivers, and instead mint, Ubuntu, or even Zorin get recommended? Is there something I am missing, or does it really just come down to people not wanting software that isn’t “cutting edge” release?

  • Wilmo@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    Debian might work but it will always be behind and if any performance upgrades are done at a kernel level or a DE then you won’t get them until those fixes are potentially already obsolete.

      • tempest@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        4 days ago

        Mint is Debian based but isn’t Debian.

        Same with Ubuntu.

        The reason people recommend mint is it’s easy to install and has a familiar DE.

          • eli@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            7 hours ago

            This is what I got blindsided by when I tried out Mint a decade ago. OS is up to date and pretty, but kernel/drivers? Old, or “stable”.

            And it’s weird seeing all of these recommendations for Mint on YouTube/social media this past year. And then watching the videos everyone is just gawking about Cinnamon…which you can install on any other distro too.

            Lots of normies hopping on the Linux train and have no idea what they’re getting into lol

            • Die4Ever@retrolemmy.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              6 hours ago

              I feel like I’m taking crazy pills when people insist that the kernel is not old, it’s “stable” lol

              • eli@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                3 hours ago

                Honestly if you’re running the latest Mint, then you’re on 6.14, which is barely a year old…but it’s still a year old kernel.

                Probably fine for mom’s laptop that is 5 years old, but if you bought something that came out in the last 6 months or you’re building a new gaming PC, then you’re really gambling on Mint being “stable” for your system.

      • Holytimes@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        3 days ago

        Because till recently gaming on Linux was a f****** joke and meant being really easy to install and basically a derivative of Ubuntu without having to deal with canonical made it a popular choice for all of the long-time Linux uses. So it’s just what they suggested.

        In reality meant is no better than just telling people to install Ubuntu or Debian if they want to game. If you just play older games then it’s whatever and it doesn’t really matter. But if you’re trying to do some niche gaming like VR or something, basically anything that uses apt is a massive pain in the f****** ass

        Sure it works but you almost always end up waiting months longer than everyone else for fixes and considering some things can get updated multiple times a week for major fixes. Having to wait months for a big cumulative thing is just not okay.

        Definitely! So if you’re using specialized hardware or software or third-party apps. A lot of stuff has actually gone to the point where they don’t even support Debian and Ubuntu or other activate systems. They only support Fedora or Arch

        Since those are the only ones that really ever have a up-to-date libraries to actually be usable for purpose without having to do a bunch of funky s***.

        Debian like normal is your best option if it works for you, it is the most reliable that you can really get. But the moment something is outside of scope of it. You’re almost always better off just using literally anything f****** else.

    • erebion@news.erebion.eu
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      Debian is not behind. Changed enter the repos pretty quickly and every 25 months you get a release. Which is perfect, as it means I don’t have to maintenance for my mother that often.

      Still there are security patches.

      If you want the newest shiny stuff, use Testing or Unstable. I’ve done that for years, for that is not the right choice for everyone, as things change on the time. And I don’t get paid for the tech support I do for my family, so I’d rather see them have larger changes less often. Family would agree, as they find it difficult to learn how to deal with the changes.

      • Holytimes@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        Even Debian unstable can be months behind a lot of fixes for gaming related things.

        VR for example is a fucking nightmare in general but God FUCK you wait months behind fedora or arch for a lot of fixes on Debian.