Thx in advice.

  • j4k3@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    Debian is like a base install IMO like Arch or Gentoo. It is not really a complete experience. It is ugly, and for the type of person that wants to play in the weeds. It requires knowing how stuff works, where to find what you need and how to configure ‘the weeds.’ Upgrading is usually a problem. Just knowing why all the software is old how to install PPA’s or figuring out flatpaks, or dealing with steam installs etc. All of that is not hard for many of us that just know, but we tend to forget all the headaches that enabled us to “just know.”

    • Pantherina@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      Yeah, it is also full or DEB GNOME stuff and has no podman, distrobox or flatpak support.

      Debian is nice but “neutral”

    • TCB13@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      It is not really a complete experience. It is ugly, and for the type of person that wants to play in the weeds

      Wtf are you even talking about? Setup Debian with all the defaults, it’s easier than Windows and you’ll get GNOME out of the box. Ugly?

      or figuring out flatpaks

      Running 2 commands to get all the flatpak software into the GNOME GUI store is very hard :P

      Debian provides a solid out of the box experience, a system that won’t break and will be compatible with most of the decent hardware out there. It won’t complain and bitch, it won’t be an half finished product like Arch. If it’s too complicated just get Ubuntu and enjoy it’s mangled kernel.

      Arch / Gentoo are the real “base installs” here, nobody can run those things out of the box without tweaks. Arch doesn’t even have an installer, just a bunch of scripts and 3rd party attempts and making something usable and you’re recommending over Debian that has a full GUI with sane defaults?