1y ago

Bell curve of Linux distributions

I use Windows btw

You're viewing a single thread.

249 comments

Ubuntu ain't what it used to be. If you want a simple distro nowadays just go straight to the source with Debian. There's no real benefit to going with Ubuntu anymore, and community distros are just a safer bet. Corporate distros aren't your friend.
- I'm very happy with debian. So many applications ship a .deb, and you don't have to deal with the Canonical bullshit.
- Ubuntu go brrrrr.
  
  Yea it sorta just works and has a lot of community support. Imo the easiest of the distros which is not a bad thing. Turn off snaps and it basically is golden. Never needed backups in like 10 years because I know how to fix everything. The only thing that fucks up at this point is Nvidia but same thing has happened to me on Fedora.
- You're mid-curve now. Ubuntu's better than ever.
  
  Distros based on Ubuntu are better than ever. Ubuntu isn't the move tho
  
  Oh yeah, Debian is such a poser distro that people only use to sound smart. I brag about how I managed to pull off a full Debian installation all the time. Memes can never, ever under any circumstances end up out of date or anything.
  Edit in response to your edit: Canonical has been neglecting the desktop version of Ubuntu for years now. They've pulled in some improvements from other distros, so technically it is better, but the only thing they've contributed to themselves are snaps, and even that's just hand-me-downs from server and IoT. The rest of the desktop Linux world has moved on. The things Ubuntu did better than anyone else ten years ago just aren't special anymore. You can like what you like, but Ubuntu is no longer the undisputed king of straightforward, user-friendly, and low maintenance.
  
  BTW keep in mind this is !linuxmemes@lemmy.world and there's a certain lightness in the robustness of arguments that goes with it. So on a more serious note, you speak of Ubuntu as having no real benefit over Debian. While I love Debian, using the Ubuntu version of Debian, I get 10 years of security support for free (for up to 5 machines). This is objectively a real benefit for anyone that doesn't plan to upgrade every two years compared to Debian. You're right in principle about corporate distros not being your friend, however Canonical isn't an IBM-owned, publicly traded corporation. Yet.
  
  It may be shocking to you, but I'm actually aware that this isn't all super serious, and I'm also being light with the robustness of my arguments. Who knew, right? That being said, Debian releases are supported for five years, not two. Ubuntu also releases a new LTS version every two years. I suppose if for some reason you thought it was still a good idea to be on Ubuntu 14.04 that'd technically be a benefit, but the implication of this thread seems to be that we're talking about desktop distros. That's certainly what I've been talking about. If you're seriously still running Ubuntu 14.04 on your home computer you're way more of a niche contrarian edge case than Arch users.
- Im fighting with you brother
- So does debian not have like 4 years old packages anymore in stable or do I have to live in bleeding edge unstable?
  
  There was just a new release, so nothing that old for now, but by the time the next release comes around this one will be getting long in the tooth, no doubt. Debian isn't for everyone, but if you need the latest version as a native app then you're not any better off with Ubuntu at this point. Debian is stable and secure and you can use flatpaks, appimages, or even snaps if you're feeling nasty to get any apps that you really need to be up to date. That's not what everyone wants, but for those people I'd recommend something like Arch, Fedora, or OpenSUSE, not Ubuntu. Ubuntu has just been neglecting the desktop for a while now, and it shows. They were the best once. Now everyone has passed them.
  
  Debian and Ubuntu LTS are both ~2 year cycles, but Debian has traditionally been better than Ubuntu at picking up security fixes
  If you sign up for Ubuntu Pro, they might be as good as Debian, now, but I haven’t checked
  If you want faster than that, something other than Debian makes sense
  
  There's also "testing" in between. It's not as stable as - well - "stable", but I didn't have trouble with it.
- What about with a laptop where you can't disable secure boot? Ubuntu works with it ootb, very few other distros do.
  
  I don't actually think there is literally no scenario where Ubuntu makes sense, especially if someone else is limiting your options. For the record though, I think Fedora has gotten to be a better Ubuntu then Ubuntu, and it works with secure boot out of the box.

249 comments