What's so great about Debian?

[glaston]

Personally, I've only been using Debian for a few months now but I have to say, I think it's great.
Slackware has always been my personal favorite.
It was the distro that I got my introduction to Linux on.
A friend of mine clued me in to it back in 1996.

Of course, it was all much more difficult back then so I didn't take to Linux right away.
I was a Mac user, and Linux wasn't user friendly in the least back then.
But after I found out that MacOSX was being built on a Unix base, I started into Linux to get acquainted with *nix systems in preparation for the release of OSX.
Slackware was the natural choice for me since it's the most Unix like.

But now that I'm getting acquainted with Debian it might replace slack as my main distro.

I guess it just depends on the user.
But overall, hype is just hype.
Just because some people rave about a certain distro doesn't mean there's anything truly spectacular about it compared to other distros.

Just as there are some people who LOVE the popcorn jelly bellies, and some who HATE them.
There's also some who choose difficult distros because they feel it sets them apart from the standard user/distro.
Elitism.
You find it everywhere you go.

[Bemk]

Ubuntu is a really nice system for GNU/Linux n00bs, like me 8 months ago. However, there are n00bs who are learning more and more every day about their system because they're digging into it. I am one of those n00bs. Updates have never broken my system(maybe because I don't use the new kernels in the updates) but I am planning on switching to Debian before it's too late.

I like eye candy too, but because it slows my system down a bit I don't really want to use it(it's nice for showing off GNU/Linux to Windows users though). Debian is low in graphics and exactly what I want to have. Once I have learned enough about Ubuntu/Debian I will make the switch. I have Debian already installed in a virtual machine, just for experimenting.

To me Debian is great because although you need to think, it is more user friendly than other systems. An example of this is the apt-get function. You just use that command and the application gets installed. I don't like the compiling, unless it is an application I wrote my self.

One thing I don't like about Ubuntu is the sudo command. It's purpose is a good thing, but I would rather having it requiring the root password instead of the users.

[DeadSilence]

Well I decided that I'm going to install Debian tomorrow. I had installed it before but before long, decided I'd stick with Ubuntu awhile longer. I remember the resolution not going above 1024x768... I'd like to set it to 1680x1050, so how do I go about doing that? Don't I have to edit an fstab file or something? Also I seem to recall not being able to use su or mount things. How do I give myself permission to do this? Also, any other things anyone might think I'd need or like to know, throw em in this topic, if you would be so kind.

[GNU-Fan]

Congratulations on your decision to install the finest operating system in the world

The resolution issue depends on the model of the graphic adapter that your system has. The monitor can play a role, too. The configuration regarding video output takes place in the file /etc/X11/xorg.conf. (fstab bears responsibility for the file systems residing on the connected drives).

Usually the configuration of the graphics should be done automatically for you at install time--providing you the maximal possible resolution from the start on. But if you run into trouble, make sure you inform us about the specific model of the hardware so we can give specific help.

Your choice of the flavour of Debian plays a role, too. Etch, Lenny, SID, ...
Etch has been well tested for years now, but is quite outdated. On the contrary, SID brings support for the newest hardware, but is always a bit experimental. So, make sure you get version Lenny.

[DeadSilence]

Well it detected my resoultion automatically, but there is a problem I'm having. My screen keeps gooing blank every few seconds and I get the message "No signal." I'm actuallly typing as it's blanked out right now so forgive any spelling errors.

[PaulyWally]

I know Ubuntu was based on it which makes it that much more cool, but what does it offer that Ubuntu does not?

Basically, I want to learn Linux... but I don't want to learn it all at once. Debian allows me to do that. Ubuntu, not so much... at least in my limited experiences.

I started to "try" to use linux about 10 years ago... and I just didn't have the time to get deep into it. So it turned into something where I would install the latest version of Red Hat a couple times a year... play with it for a few days... and decide I didn't have the time to learn it.

Then about 3 years ago I found an old Red Hat 6.1 disc laying around, and figured I'd install it for giggles. Shortly after I found out then that Red Hat was no longer a free download (or I wasn't looking in the right place). So I poked around, asked some questions, read some "which distro is right for me" articles, and decided on Debian. I just really liked it from the get go. For me (been working on Windows networks/programming for 12 years) it was a smooth transition. It seemed to provide a good challenge without being overly cryptic or frustrating - which was always the case with Red Hat.

To me, there was nothing fun about installing an OS that I knew very little about... and then not having a functional system to learn with. Something with every Red Hat install always went wrong. So I became an "expert" at fixing broken installs and that just turned me off to learning it.

Debian offered a functional system from the start which gave me the ability to learn at my own pace. I never felt like I didn't have the time to learn. And the online community is great. There are a lot of users that seem to be more willing to help the newbies (like me) without giving attitude.

After I started learning the system, I was amazed at how "lightweight" a base install with X is. I rarely use swap space... I have 7 apps open in X Windows right now and am using only 225MB of RAM... and when I'm doing video editing, the real-time compositing only takes 50% of each processor (dual core Intel E8400).

Finally, Debian packages just rock! This is another area that gives people like me the ability to learn at their own pace. I never have to worry about downloading the source, chasing after dependencies, and then making each package individually only to find that one of them just won't compile correctly.

At one point, someone talked me into trying Ubuntu. I did... and I did not have a functional system because it didn't properly configure my video during the install. That was an easy fix... but it took me back to the frustrating days of fixing a broken install. And if "the most user-friendly Linux distro" didn't configure my video correctly upon install, I didn't want to wait around to see what else it didn't do correctly.

[Daan]

In my experience, Ubuntu is less stable, and Debian is harder to configure. These are especially problems on laptops. I have had Ubuntu on my laptop for a couple of months now, and I am getting freeze ups, unresponsive programs, unexplainable 100% CPU usage, etc. But everything, including the wireless, worked straight out of the box. Now I have installed Debian Lenny and I was surprised that it got the screen resolution right at once (it did not when I tried Etch before). With the help of the people here at the forums, I got the wireless to work. However, suspend to RAM does not work, I need to remove the battery to get it to reboot - so that needs some more effort.

But I really enjoy Debian on my desktop computers: with the testing (Lenny) version you have recent software and many many packages (more than with Ubuntu I think).

[Gary910]

I have a computer consulting business. I like Debian because I believe it to be stable. Ubuntu puts in many features for that "WOW" factor. That is cool, but for my clients I feel comfortable using Debian.

JMO