419
Why doesn't everyone just use Debian?(self.debian)
submitted 2 months, 2 weeks ago* (edited 28 minutes after) by Financial-Wish-311 to /r/debian (128.4k)
Took a little bit of serious reading and a few weeks of playing around with Debian and Emacs to begi...
5 days, 13 hours ago
—
2 months, 2 weeks ago99 of 99
Tip Reveddit Real-Time can notify you when your content is removed.
your account history
Tip Check if your account has any removed comments.
view my removed comments you are viewing a single comment's thread.
view all comments
Most people don’t want to do the first few words of this post. They want to buy something, open it, and have everything work.
Things do just work. It’s more that Debian is boring. You’re not constantly tweaking, chasing new features, or distro hopping to find the “perfect distro”. Also, in general Debian users aren’t zealots. I run whatever distro fits the need, it just happens to be Debian 90% of the time.
Stable. Reliable. Debian.
That’s it.
I love Debian and use it everyday. But it isn't really plug and play. Things are much better than they used to be, but there's much to improve. I ran into problems with my Nvidia drivers and multiple drives. I know how to do this stuff, but someone who isn't very comfortable with this just won't.
I love Debian, and find it basically plug-and-play, but setting up full disk encryption... and using it... definitely doesn't feel like just opening up a Mac.
Otherwise though, Gnome Desktop is like a better MacOS. Sad to say, but for the last some-odd years I feel like they have just been layering more and more ways to do the same damn things in MacOS to keep designers employed.
Part of the fun/problem is that some things work without plug-and-play, and it makes users want to try things.
On a Mac it's mostly just "is this supported, yes or no" - no grey area.
For example, I just installed Debian on a computer with a USB wifi adapter. It didn't work with Trixie out of the box. On a Mac, if it doesn't work out of the box, and the vendor doesn't sell drivers, that's basically the end of the road. On Debian I was able to enable Backports, install a newer kernel and now it works great.
Part of the fun and the pain, I guess.
Nvidia being non-free is not the fault of Debian.
This is irrelevant to a regular user.
Then regular user must know that debian in that particular case is not for him and choose mint for example.
And basically answers OP's question
Meh, just ship hardware with the non-free repo enabled
And search for the next distro if any other hardware does not work? Not all Users are like you or your friends that have interest or time for that.
We are a really small bubble that know there are Linux. And many from us have problems without headaches and give some new user advice which distro to use.
And the reason why I don't buy Nvidia graphic cards. I'm not gaming or doing high-end graphics. These days, on board graphics perform well enough for my use.
After all, Nvidia is driving the AI boat. Just glad I can use it on my system. On the other hand, what would Nvidia do without a Linux cluster to run on.
The truth is when wi-fi drivers started working ootb it's just enough for me and I've switched back from Mint.
OK, I still have this one network printer at work and I'm pretty sure it could work... But I already spent some time on this and I also have a network drive and some windows machines I can print from, so this is a very low priority job.
Ian loved deb too didn’t end well for Ian.
Even for gaming? What is the difference between Linux and Debian?
Debian is (a) Linux (distro).
Haven’t tried Debian for gaming. I use Mint Xfce for gaming. Works fine.
I mean stable debian is a bit outdated. Reliable, yes, but also boooring. Kind of distro you would install on your grandma's PC.
Yes, but if you want a little more fringe things you get into a lot of work with package versions that aren’t problems on Arch.
I have been a Debian user for decades, and things definitely do not "just work" on Debian Desktop. I lost count of the amount of times basic stuff like audio broke, to mention one example.
Which branch are you running? I've been using Debian Stable as my daily driver since 2006. While it's not perfect, it has improved markedly over the years. But audio just breaking? No. I've had audio devices recognized but not playable, but that's not Debian's fault.
For reference, the audio device in question is the Focusrite Scarlett 18i20 2nd gen.
oss -> alsa -> jack -> pulseaudio -> pipewire -> whatever comes next
every upgrade came with issues.
Going from Jack to PulseAudio seems like an odd move.
Were you trying to do audio production with PulseAudio?
Jack is a beast. Pulseaudio, IIRC, was littered with issues when it first came out. I don't know what your setup is like but I do recall audio in the early to mid-2000s being unnecessarily tricky or having issues. This was not limited to Debian as I had issues with SUSE, Ubuntu, and Mandrake (and its derivatives). The hardware I was using at the time was mainstream, integrated audio on Pentium 4-era Dell Optiplex and IBM NetVista and ThinkCentre desktops, basic Sound Blaster PCI cards.
Pipe wire is done and now at prime time. It makes audio management easier than both windows and Mac at this point.
Well, it did not work on my laptop.
Are you saying this is a Debian issue? Seems like a general Linux issue. That said, I’ve also used Debian for decades and the past 15 years I’ve never had audio issues. Nvidia drivers were a pain for awhile and wifi drivers needed non-free but everything else worked “out of the box”. And in the past 4-5 years, zero issues.
And that’s on desktop, on servers its an even better story as fast moving hardware support is less on a concern (RAID controllers notwithstanding).
Maybe my experience is unusual, but I don’t think it is.
I was responding to someone saying "Debian just works", which is not correct in my experience. If that is Debian specific or not is irrelevant for me.
The whole "just works" mantra/slogan/phrase/marketing/whatever really needs to stop. No operating system "just works." Not Windows, not Mac, not Ubuntu, not SUSE, not Debian. If this were actually true, the number of support requests and forum/mailing list posts would decrease exponentially.
You obviously haven’t used a Mac. No media required you can slap in a blank hard drive and PXE boot from the Internet. Yes you can do that with Dell and Ubuntu but requires some computer literacy. Macs really are brain dead simple. Microsoft isn’t even close to booting without problems with a USB stick let alone across the Internet.
Yeah, that someone was me. And you’ll have the same driver issues on Windows as well. Mac OS is generally better but that’s because they have a tighter grip on the hardware ecosystem.
I assume it's not particularly debian problem. I have issues with audio on arch as well
this.
Linux now is simple. go back to 2000 and try it.
You ever tried to compile then get X running? Bwahahaha.
I remember looking up the specs on my monitor and putting it into xfree86.config. Xrandr couldn't come too soon
I blew up a new sony trinitron 19" monitor.
NOT knowing you had to use a different refresh vertical from horizontal.
The firmware on my Mitsubishi monitor threw up a bright red error screen about sync ranges. You never think of software as being capable of destroying hardware but the guard rails are pretty weak in that case
not only X, I remember how I struggled to install modem drivers in Debian 3. It took many days to get a proper driver (./configure & make & make install) and it never compiles ... on the other hand Windows XP just worked fine ..
Has the audio situation improved? Pipewire or pulse or Jack
Weird, I switched to debian back during the glibc upgrade disaster and haven't looked back. I've found debian to be consistently more stable and reliable than any other option.
Debian being boring is also the main reason why I used it for over 15 years with little exceptions. Tried Ubuntu for desktop but I just don't like gnome for some reason, nowadays I stick with Debian+KDE Plasma for anything that has a screen I use and Debian without DE for anything else.
Maybe that's also why I instantly loved proxmox once I found out about it.
Boring is good, Debian is good.
Ive been running Sid for decades, just seamlessly upgrading through the ages.
Of course only applying security patches immediately, I mean, always give the planet a chance to quality-assure updates :)
I've been running Testing on my home desktop and laptop for a decade, at least. It's more stable than Ubuntu, in my experience.
Testing? What is this? I'm kind of a newbie. Lol
Curiosity and initiative would serve you well.
https://wiki.debian.org/DebianTesting
I think I've fallen into Simon Wardley's marketing trap and stuck exclusively to Ubuntu / Gnome for many years. It's always felt unfinished and the UX of Gnome is questionable. Will try Debian + KDE.
Gnome is great, i didn't try kde plasma, what is the performance of kde plasma in terms of cpu and ram consumption?
In my experience it’s similar performance but KDE is a tad lighter. Feels more like Windows but prettier and without bloat
That's why I stick with Kubuntu. Debian would be my choice if Kubuntu went away.
TDE here
You want to support mom/grandma/sister/friend that thinks wifi is the internet or sees a computer as a mystery box that just works ?
That's why for me.
Are people still referring to the whole computer as the CPU or hard drive? I've been out of the support game for a while. Just askin' out of curiousity.
Yeah, you still get people referring to the 'box' as the hard dribe, sometimes CPU. Sweet really.
If they can afford it, they should just stick with an iPad.
Otherwise I go with Linux Mint, or possibly Fedora/Ubuntu.
I don't think Debian gives you enough hand holding for those types of users.
I have to disagree about the zealot thing. I've interacted with *a lot* of the zealots over the years. Fortunately it's not as prominent as it once was.
Oh boy, Debian Forums... I remember that place back in the day! Mention Ubuntu in 2005-2009 and you used to get crucified!
Yeah, Debian has had some zealots.
What's interesting is the mailing lists used to be just as brutal but there was a push by leadership to tone it down since it did have a reputation of pushing away new users. Since then it's been great. I don't know if the forums ever improved but I never went back after a couple crucifixions.
The closest I come to being a distro zealot is that I really like Debian, so I've chosen to use it or distros derived from it for years. I'm using Pop!_OS these days because I decided to buy a computer from System 76 and it's the distro they've tailored to the hardware. I'm willing to have someone else do that in this case. I'm happy with both the computer and the distro.
yes, buy you still need to install it, while you have windows and macos preinstalled on your pc
also if we speak about linux community I don't see any reason to use debian as a simple user. I played with arch, because I wanted to, but lately I stopped on bazzite, because I install it and it has everything I might need to start using it. Stability is also present, thanks for being atomic
I disagree that Debian "just works", especially when it comes to stuff like proprietary drivers, codecs and the like.
Yes that is more or less a checkbox, but it's one that's disabled by default and also utterly essential for your setup to work. And "normal people" do not know what on Earth a "proprietary codec" is
It's too boring almost. I forget to update sometimes.
I think OP was talking about "normal people" and xINFLAMES325x was replying also about "normal people".
By normal people meaning ones that just use Windows or MacOs and never even bother thinking about Linux, because Linux == hard in their minds.
That's my experience. Kind of boring. I use it at work and they don't pay me to sysadmin my own machine all day. I'm glad people find enjoyment in ricing and hopping, but I have work to do.
Not always. A lot depends on your hardware and a lot depends on what software you use. Rando issues like mice not working, resolutions problems with multiple monitors, etc.
I use Windows for my desktop, Mac for my laptops, because they're a lot fewer hardware compatibility issues (pretty much zero with Mac) and the software I run runs native on them.
I use Debian these days for my server and container installations because that's the best tool for that job in my case.
Can someone go into best buy Or the local computer store and buy a computer that comes with Debian Pre-installed on it? Most people use windows and mac because it is what they see for sale at stores. The average computer user barely even knows that Linux exists.
Most users are not going to buy a computer and then install an operating system on it. They want to buy a computer push the power button answer a few simple questions and use the computer they purchased.
f... I'm just browsing around for Debian tips or stuff because I can't find decent stuff after trying to move from Windows to Debian. Not a decent RDP client, almost no browser support (ungoogled-chromium installed fine with .deb but didn't solve DNS)... A LOT of browsing blindly for not being able to set up a decent RDP server (xrdp)... everything is a rabbit-hole
Im typing this on ubuntu, wtf is "wrong" with gnome? Both gnome and KDE been around forever, both have worked overall pretty well, I have no idea why some people hate gnome so much? It is just some desktop environment with virtual desktops, some controls like volume, and a dock... wtf is "wrong" with that? And you can "theme" it if you like some other colors or whatever....?
Gnome doesn't look like Mac. It looks and feels like someone who has never seen a Mac in person and only read online how terrible they are tried to copy one.
ah, gotcha - I was just wondering. Some desktops really arent all that pretty or "riced" :P
I’m tech savvy and have use windows Linux MacOS and various flavors of Unix back in the day (irix, Solaris, etc).
I prefer gnome. I don’t want a 90s style menu driven windows like interface. I do enable dash to dock/panel so it behaves more like a Mac.
And my view is gnome is vastly superior via trackpad on a laptop.
well thanks for the condescending bullshit response.
Why do you think tech savvy people must want or require shitty dated 90s style menu driven interfaces?
Maybe you're a luddite and I'm not.
Maybe change scares you and it doesn't scare me.
Maybe you think the peak of computing is what you first used, maybe I have used - and continue to use - so many different system I know there is no such thing as best.
I use windows, linux and macOS every single day. Like them all for different reasons. But again, I'm not a luddite.
I just think it's hilarious that you people think the UI developed in the 80s/early 90s is the only way to use a computer. But whatever, I like gnome. So do lots of people. Pretty sure it's the default on most distros. And with good reason... its great.
That other person is an asshole but tbh I like the old design because it’s comfortable, that’s why I like KDE the most. It follows the same design principles of the 90s-00s but still feels sleek and modern. Gnome feels very MacOS flavored which looks and feels really nice but I grew up using Windows and just feel more at home with something like KDE or Xfce. Plus I use old hardware so all of Gnome’s animations take up a lot of processing power lol.
I have settled on Debian with Cinnamon, with various KDE utilities and Evolution.
Some edge cases:
- None of the video streaming services work or show only 720p or worse because of DRM.
- Some of the popular multiplayer game won't work because of anti-cheat.
-Very few of the PDF viewers can actually edit PDF:s.
>I don't see any advantage of Windows for the average user who primarily consumes content and essentially uses a browser and nothing else.
I think gaming and Office were the real, actual big sellers for forsaken windos... and in the past, general hardware compatibility, drivers and support, like you said.
linux as a whole has massssssively improved in that regard over the years, I am pretty OG on linux and even I cannot believe how far it has come as a whole. Especially gaming. And "office" has been pretty much solved ever since open/libreoffice, the apple clones, and google online docs/sheets... M$-office just has a ton of "business" features that, lets be honest, hardly anyone really ACTUALLY needs. you could even just use markdown and be more than fine nowadays.
macOS and apple in general has that "special" nike-vibe, and they do focus a ton on UI/UX and general experience and integration with their ecosystem while mainly being a HARDWARE seller, not an ads-and-subscriptions-only company like M$ seems to be turning into more and more... they do a pretty good job of focusing only on the most important config options and trying to pick good defaults for most users, make everything as seamless and easy and safe as possible.. plus running on a rocksolid, modern unix kernel certainly helps. And the hardware is not bad, not bleeding-edge performance, but not bad at all. It is a very well interconnected package they are offering, with a focus on the average user.. which is why some people just hate it.
XFCE is simpler. Once gnomish went to 3.0 it sucked.
Everything does just work, usually. The argument I sometimes hear is "But I have new hardware" (read: a 50xx GPU).
When setting up my 50xx-equipped gaming PC with Debian, the only thing I had to do was install the newer Nvidia drivers (since the 50xx series is not supported by the 550 drivers).
Just add the repo (conveniently and automatically with their .deb), install the driver and import the key with mokutil if you still occasionally need to boot windows. Nowadays it even generates mok.pub for you so you literally just need to enroll it.
Don't get me wrong, I get the fun of playing with different distros and trying out newer features, but I prefer Debian for my main computers. That's just me though, and the beauty of Linux is that everyone can choose to do whatever they want.
But it's not necessary. It's very easy to install, you get a fully functioning environment, and it's ready to go. I'm also curious how Debian is not much more popular among desktop users.
Over the last 25+ years I have installed Debian on probably more than 100 devices (not counting server hardware). I'd say on ~60 there was an issue after installation that required expert knowledge to fix (which I have, but many people do not).
Makes me feel very lucky. I've installed around 20-25 times so far, I faced a single type of problem twice: the wifi driver was not included into the standard installer, so I had to manually add (if my memory serves me well, happened like 10 years ago), but that's it.
I'd be interested in your experience: what type of problems have you faced?
because up until about 5 years ago, ubuntu and such had easier installs than Deb did.
and if you want gaming and up to date packages ubuntu is still easier than debian-testing
Debian is easier to install than windows at this point
Tell a normal windows user to download a Debian ISO. Then don’t tell them which ISO to download. Or how to get to it on the website. Or how to write it to anything. Do they have a USB thumb drive? Probably not. Then tell them either what disk partitioning means or how to do it. Then tell them what task-sel is showing for DEs. I’m sorry, I don’t agree at all.
I mean you need all that to install windows too.
Normal user is not installing windows. They are buying a machine with windows on it. See my original post.
Thats what's funny is they'll pay and still hate it.
If Ubuntu was marketed for profit people who have no clue would be sucking its dick.
True, but it would be easy enough for a hardware manufacture to have a working Debian system in the box ready to use.
Not sure what that has to do with Debian. Even if everything was flawless from the beginning, Debian's Stable philosophy may not be for everyone.