Kuchenstück vom RansliteWhy is Debian always left out of the distro recommendations?
UnfinishedProjectsI 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in Debian (because Debian was always mentioned as a distro good for servers, or stable machines that are ok with outdated software)
And while I get that Debian does have software that isn’t as up to date, I’ve never felt that the software was that outdated.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?
One of the main historical reasons was the Debian project’s puritan approach to open source, meaning the distro was very picky about what it could easily run on. As an example, most network drivers for Realtek nics weren’t included out of the box as they contained non-free code, there was no direct way to install Nvidia drivers instead of nouveau, a lot of the hardware didn’t work in the installer unless you sideloaded the drivers from a usb stick and so on.
There was a non-free ISO version to get around this, but you needed to know of it to use it, and it wasn’t provided anywhere by default. The download page for it was just a barebone directory listing within the mirror. No link or information was provided for it on the main project page.
Starting from version 12 or 13 (don’t remember exactly) proprietary drivers have been included in the installation images, which removed the biggest pain point (IMO) for novice users. Apart from that Debian has been one of the easier distros to install, and has things like a considerably better experience when updating to the next major release. It’s not really slower to update packages than Ubuntu, as I’d be wary of recommending the non-LTS versions to novice users. They tend to be quite unstable compared to LTS.
Personally I’ve daily driven Debian for close to five years, on all my devices except the work laptop. That one is running Ubuntu 24.04 as the employer requires either that or Fedora for Linux users.
Thanks for the info, I was not entirely aware about the fact that they recently changes their proprietary software approach.
it is from debian 12 onwards that installer includes non free firmware, and also has a easy opt in for non free firmware repo enabling
For reasons similar to why plain bread doesn’t show up in sandwich recommendations.
That’s my take too… it’s certainly a soild choice, but not incredibly exciting.
Debian and Red Hat are the foundation for most of the popular distros out there.
It really depends on the situation. Hardware support is definitely better than it used to be and everything in linux is hackable regardless of distribution if needed, but the reason I haven’t switched my main tower from Arch to Debian is that fear of requiring extra work for things like gaming and music production. If you’re running the newest and latest hardware you might run into an issue depending on the kernel version being used, etc.,
That being said, I use Debian every day on my thinkpad and love it. I have an interest in migrating away from Ubuntu Server and toward Debian for servers as well. I don’t think I’ve ever heard it “not recommended”, just similar caution expressed.
Debian is more like AOSP. It’s a starting point. Super bare. More commonly used in servers and such.
Also things tend to be older on Debian which isn’t the fit for more gaming oriented systems. Due to optimization not being yet available and drivers for the latest hardware
Ah, ok - yeah I can definitely see how for gaming it might not be ideal. I’ve never thought Linux was all that smooth of a transition for gamers though, no matter what OS you’re using - but I guess that heavily depends on the games you’re playing.
Gaming on Linux has been really good for the last several years. The main issue is certain multiplayer games that intentionally block Linux users.
It’s pretty smooth on bazzite aside from kernel anti-cheat games. Just run em through steam, even pirated games
Even with games that usually use kernal anti-cheat systems like battleeye, some games specifically have enabled proton support and just work as well.
What would be considered “bare” about it? Granted, I’m not gaming on it or anything, but I’ve found it to work pretty well out of the box, just downloading software as I need - but nothing that has caused any sort of headache due to missing drivers or anything like that.
To me it seems like it would be pretty simple for most people to switch over from windows - albiet maybe not for the super beginners that have never seen a command line - but for most semi-tech literate, I would think it would be a decent entry into Linux.
Genuinely curious what is actually stripped down or missing, because maybe it’s just something that I’m not even aware that I’m missing out on, lol
Older drivers won’t support newer hardware. Only includes default apps from gnome and KDE. No DE tweaks to speak of. No performance optimizations. No Gear Lever. No fractional scaling implemented, etc. etc.
I guess it makes sense that I’m comfortable with using Debian then, lol, because I don’t know what most of those things you mentioned are - haha.
Thanks for the explanation though :)
no fractional scaling? thats a DE/WM feature not distro related
old drivers? so is every stable point release distro unless you go out of your way to get an to date kernel,
only includes default apps? you mean following the DE’s developer’s vision? (sure for gnome it is a downside for most, tweaks should 100% be included on all gnome installs)
Lots of distros these days come out of the box with that pre-configured, so no, it’s not.
Yes.
I don’t know the AOSP acronym so I’ll take a guess: Always On Server Platform?
Android Open Source Project, it’s the open base that the actual Android releases are built upon. It’s not really usable as is, since it lacks the required kernel blobs and software that people have come to expect (like Google’s proprietary stuff).
Android open source project. It’s the base behind every android variation, but it has pretty generic software (although sometimes better than the alternatives companies choose to ship instead).
Super bare. 🤣🤣🤣
Debian is probably Thee most supported distro with the most packages available.
Debian is also among the absolute best among Linux desktop options, and actually quite popular.
There’s a reason Debian is still the most forked distro.
I’m not talking about availability. I’m talking about comes pre-installed so the user doesn’t have to go out and find them to use basic functionality.
I did not say it was not great or popular.
This is not the dunk you think it is…
Apart from Steam not being a standard installed item, it is pretty feature full.
For 32 bit you also need to enable multi-arch.
But apart from gaming it is in no way bare and very very far from “super bare”.
You wrote it was mostly for servers. Which although it is an excellent server distro, it is most definitely developed at least as much for desktop use.
I don’t think you really understand the implications.
Because linux distribution recommendations are written by people who have nothing better to do than be hypnotized by the jangling keys of whatever’s new or hot for people who have nothing better to do than be hypnotized by the jangling keys of whatever’s new or hot.
It’s the same reason rhel doesn’t get recommended tbh.
well there is more to the lack of RHEL recomendation, no sane person likes corporate lock in and although rhel is fairly open there is always a little bit more than with debian
Debian is generalist, with it’s strongest strength being it’s stability. That said, I’m not sure who I would recommend it to. Zorin or Mint would be better for new linux users, and Debian’s slower updates mean it will fall behind other distros for anyone wanting games. Also the rise of immutable distros means that it’s stability isn’t as much of a selling point as it used to be, if I’m worried about a kid messing up the install an immutable distro would be better than Debian probably.
I have a lot of respect for Debian, but the main people I hear using it these days are more experienced linux users who want to settle down (done distro hopping) and just have a reliable computer for non-gaming stuff.
Mostly, this makes sense to me - but at the end you stated that people who want to settle down and have a reliable computer for non gaming stuff - and I would think that this would be a parallel userbase for non gamers coming from windows. Granted you did say “experienced” Linux users, but I honestly find Debian to be extremely noob friendly after the initial Linux familiarization of how installing apps and such works. And with LLMs these days, troubleshooting any issues is pretty easy, especially on .deb . Idk, maybe I’ve just become a fanboy or something, but I just feel that the distro gets overlooked as an overly stable/outdated option for servers when I’ve had an absolute great experience so far as a daily driver (of course, not playing games)
PClinuxOS sees your favourite distro omitted and understands.
You can somewhat avoid the issue of old packages by running the testing version instead of stable, but in that case you should ensure you get security updates from unstable: https://github.com/khimaros/debian-hybrid
I used to run some systems on Debian testing and never had any issues.
It might just be that, people tend to gravitate to the next shiny new thing. But you’re right, even when the application repos skew a bit older they’re not really that old. And technically nothing is stopping you from running a more up-to-date application via flatpak, appimage, or just compiling directly. I think it’s perfect for people looking for a more vanilla boring experience with the standard DE environments (GNOME, KDE, etc.).
I will say for total noobs another distro is maybe more friendlier, more polished installer, etc.. before settling on Debian I was happily using Ubuntu which felt easier for someone still getting used to Linux. But I always knew it was Debian based which made me curious about eventually just running Debian itself… nowadays Debian is my main and has been great.
Debian is fine distro and many people rely on it as strong foundation including the people that build ubuntu and mint. Maybe Debian is the hidden champion.
When Ubuntu became popular, it had some advantages like reliable release cycles, slightly newer packages, better integration of proprietary drivers. Stuff that was not wanted in Debian stable main at the time.
Other non-debian-based distros also brought some advantages.
Personally, I’d love to see Debian as the base distro with Mint, Ubuntu and others building ontop of it. I like my apt update. I just won’t send novices straight to Debian when the derivates have more desktop users.
Shut up Debbie! Nobody likes your name!
One thing I have yet to seen brung up in the replies yet, is Debian Testing and Debian Unstable
I have been using unstable on my desktop no issues,I would say that it is suprisingly stable, I only had one breakage so far and I have used it for one year as my main and sole system
In my experience, the Debian installer is just confusing. Once you’re past that, the userbase is smaller than Ubuntu’s. Their repos are different too, meaning software packaged for Ubuntu isn’t guaranteed to work on Debian. Ubuntu itself is pretty terrible for its own reasons, so when asked for a desktop Linux distribution “close to Ubuntu” I’d put Mint first. (For general recommendation, I’d probably say Fedora now.)
Debian 13 is still relatively new, so the problems of it being out of date aren’t showing yet. Debian 12 just before 13 released had tons of these issues, like glibc being too old for some binary programs, or the kernel not being new enough for some “gaming” features.
For reference, I am on Arch Linux. I feel I have a good understanding of how to manually install Linux. The Debian installer confused me in many ways, the main one being that “language and region” are closely tied, and selecting en_US “language” forces you to choose an American timezone later in the installer. In general it was a slow install process too. This is something other “user friendly” distros handle much better. A default live environment, a quick installation, and options being there, but having the defaults automatically correct (like timezone).
Like (almost) every other distro, Debian has its own benefits and downsides. These make it a good fit on desktop for slightly more experienced users, or users familiar with
apt. This means it isn’t in the list of distros I’d generally recommend to people when they’re not familiar with Linux.Just wanted to add that Debian officially offers live GUI installers with a bunch of DEs just like other mainstream distributions :)
https://www.debian.org/CD/live/#choose_live
Is it? I feel like there’s far more Debian systems in the world, if you include servers.
Thanks for the detailed reply - great points!
Personally, yeah it’s the old packages. I want to play games on my desktop and have the newest DE features. An arch based distro seems like it’ll keep up better than Debian.
For my servers though, I only use Debian.
Ok, so it seems that gaming is a recurring theme from the few comments so far.
My curiosity then would lead me to wonder opinions from a non-gaming standpoint.
Do you think you would mind as much if you didn’t use your machine for gaming? Would the slightly older packages still affect you?