What will I be missing moving to debain?

[expelledboy]

My last ubuntu dist-upgrade didnt go so well, but I was working and I really couldnt do anything about it. I noticed that debain has just released its latest stable release and I thought seeing as its about as recent as ubuntu's last release maybe I should give it a try.

My question is what will I be missing by moving to debian? Is there anything that ubuntu has that is significantly newer for good enough reasons? And if so cant I just install those packages separately from testing?

I will be using the computer as a Desktop PC. Does debian not have up-to-date user oriented software such as compiz and its later features?

Something else I noticed, nothing to do with debian vs ubuntu, but the ubuntu supported firefox is hugely slower than others that you can get from Mozilla site for example. And considering I am online 24/7 this is not good. But tbh firefox hasnt been the same since version 3 came out. Version 2 used to be nippy, then you would customize it with features you wanted, and it was still reasonably fast!

[ubunterooster]

Nautilus was (last I tried much more difficult to use) Deal-breaker for me

Debian does have most of the features that Ubuntu does but Ubuntu refines the features but manages to bog many things down in the process. Perhaps you would prefer the further refinement of Mint? It has less problems as it focuses on stability and ease of use

[expelledboy]

Perhaps you would prefer the further refinement of Mint? It has less problems as it focuses on stability and ease of use

Its is based off debain, not ubuntu? Can you use ubuntu specific packages?

[ubunterooster]

Mint is based somewhat on Ubuntu but uses many of its own extra packages and its on kernel, but it does boast full compatibility with Ubuntu packages.

[Old Marcus]

It uses Ubuntu's kernel, but yeah, it's essentially Ubuntu refined and smartened up. Kind of like taking the mad professor with his hair standing on end, giving him a wash, haircut and a decent outfit then sending him back to the lab. :P

[Ghil]

Linux Mint is currently based off Ubuntu, and is completely compatible with ubuntu packages. There is a project to switch to debian though (here's a link to their blog (http://www.linuxmint.com/blog/?p=1467))

Also Debian is not that different from Ubuntu, but Ubuntu does sugar coat a lot, and tries to be the almighty easy distribution for new users, and ends up bogging down Debian a little, as a result. You should try it yourself :)

Might I add an alternative? why not go with something completely different and awesome, like Arch Linux (http://www.archlinux.org/)? It might be harder at first, but you will end up knowing a lot more about your computer and linux in general in the process, and Arch is really well documented. :)

[tekkidd]

Nothing really, all really that you will be missing is all the tweaks ubuntu has added such as having the window buttons on the Left and the nice theme and wallpapers. If you are moving to debian i highly suggest you run testing rather than stable because even though stable is really stable, its the same as running ubuntu 8.04. Testing is not quite as stable but it is far stabler than ubuntu. Some other things that debian does not have is the super fast boot times and a bootsplash. Although with some tweaking you can add those things. Debian also does not have out of the box ipod compatibility but it can be added if you need it.

[Sporkman]

Salle DeBain?

[mamamia88]

last time i tried it too me forever to get wireless working and the touchpad on my laptop moved as slow as molasses. will have to try again sometime. anyone know if ppas work in debian?

[NightwishFan]

Not much Debian is pretty amazing. I use Ubuntu for the innovation, flexibility of deployment, and awesome community. Also its much easier to make a usable live system with Ubuntu. If you stay within the range of 32-64bit arch, Ubuntu will actually perform quite similar to Debian. Try a minimal install using the Alternate Install CD. Install fluxbox, or icewm, or even gnome-desktop-environment, etc.

[Warpnow]

Fast repositories.

Dear god some of the debian repositories are so slow. You'll likely have to change your mirrors a few times to find one that doesn't take hours to upgrade.

[cascade9]

My last ubuntu dist-upgrade didnt go so well, but I was working and I really couldnt do anything about it. I noticed that debain has just released its latest stable release and I thought seeing as its about as recent as ubuntu's last release maybe I should give it a try.

No, the current debian stable is lenny, and it was released 15-02-2009.

http://www.debian.org/


My question is what will I be missing by moving to debian? Is there anything that ubuntu has that is significantly newer for good enough reasons? And if so cant I just install those packages separately from testing?

The main thing that people miss is jockey-gtk (ubuntu hardware drivers instalation tol). AFAIK its pretty much uninstallable on debian, as it uses the linux-restricted-modules package and that doesnt exist in debian.

Installing programs from 'testing' onto 'stable' isnt recommended.


I will be using the computer as a Desktop PC. Does debian not have up-to-date user oriented software such as compiz and its later features?

Its got all that sort of stuff, but for 'stable' the versions can be quite a bit older than you would find in ubuntu. Not always though.


Not much Debian is pretty amazing. I use Ubuntu for the innovation, flexibility of deployment, and awesome community. Also its much easier to make a usable live system with Ubuntu. If you stay within the range of 32-64bit arch, Ubuntu will actually perform quite similar to Debian. Try a minimal install using the Alternate Install CD. Install fluxbox, or icewm, or even gnome-desktop-environment, etc.

If you want to do minimal installs, ubuntu its that much different in perfromance, but normal ubuntu installs are a lot slower.

If you want a liveCD debian, there are .isos around....or use sidux, its liveCD is pretty nice.

[XubuRoxMySox]

Debian is easy enough to install. The current Stable version ("Lenny") is rock-stable and has older, tried-and-true software. The Testing version has more up-to-date software and I think it's as stable as Lenny. The more volatile version, Unstable, called "Sid," is the one on which Ubuntu is ordinarily built. Ubuntu 10.04 is built on Debian Testing, but most versions are built from "Sid" and are unstable as defined by the Debian community.

You choose your own desktop with the Debian Net-install. You can use Gnome (like Ubuntu), Xfce (like Xubuntu), KDE (like Kubuntu), or LXDE (like Lubuntu). But without the stuff that is added by the 'buntu developers, you'll find the Debian desktops "plainer and more bland," but also lighter and a little faster.

Frankly I find it much easier to install minimal Ubuntu (and add only what I want) than to install Debian and add only what I want. The installation process is much easier with even minimal Ubuntu than with Debian's installer (although they've really improved the Debian installer lately), and you get Ubuntu's huge, ginormous, and fast repositories and this very friendly and helpful community. You'll certainly find the Debian community much less helpful and much less friendly.

-Robin

[expelledboy]

Okay thanks.

I will stick with ubuntu then, maybe try out mint. I still want to give debian a try thou. I think I will reinstall my mom's pc instead, even thou there is nothing wrong with it. :P

[bug67]

"...you get Ubuntu's huge, ginormous, and fast repositories and this very friendly and helpful community. You'll certainly find the Debian community much less helpful and much less friendly."

-Robin

This.

If you decide to try Debian and wonder to yourself, "where is/how do I install Firefox?" For the love of all that is holy, DO NOT ask about Firefox on Debian's forum!

I'm using Linux Mint 8 (based on Karmic Koala) right now and absolutely LOVE it. It is, IMO, much more refined. I tried both Ubuntu 10.04 and Linux Mint 9 and found some things I just couldn't deal with.

I'm curious to see if Mint does indeed move from an Ubuntu base and move to a Debian base. I really like what they do with Ubuntu. Be nice to see what they do with a more base form. Remove the middle man so to say.

[Junkieman]

If you want to try Debian, you should! A dual boot is one option, to see how it works directly with your hardware. A Virtual Machine if you just want to play around with the environment :)

The one difference I noticed is that the Debian (as of writing this) does not have ext4 support by default, it can be added by adding the module to the kernel manually.

For those who aren't sure which distro branced off which, have a look at this fantastic distro timeline (http://futurist.se/gldt/)! :D

[Shakz]

Linux Mint is currently based off Ubuntu, and is completely compatible with ubuntu packages. There is a project to switch to debian though (here's a link to their blog (http://www.linuxmint.com/blog/?p=1467))

Also Debian is not that different from Ubuntu, but Ubuntu does sugar coat a lot, and tries to be the almighty easy distribution for new users, and ends up bogging down Debian a little, as a result. You should try it yourself :)

Might I add an alternative? why not go with something completely different and awesome, like Arch Linux (http://www.archlinux.org/)? It might be harder at first, but you will end up knowing a lot more about your computer and linux in general in the process, and Arch is really well documented. :)

I am gonna +1 this post. I went from Ubuntu (for the same reasons as the OP) to mint which is wonderful and my distro of choice for new folks (my friends and family) to Arch with the KDE package. I have always hated KDE till I used it with Arch. I am a happy camper now.

Gotta say....the ubuntu community keeps me coming back. I reckon Nix is Nix and its free so backup your data and distro hop till you find one your happy with. Lotta fantastic distros out there that are not the top 5.

[Pogeymanz]

Dang, this article from DistroWatch is getting too dated for me to use much longer.

Well, read it anyway for some fun.
http://distrowatch.com/weekly.php?issue=20090427

You'll lose a lot of bloat when going from Ubuntu to Debian. Try it out.

[NightwishFan]

The Xubuntu vs Debian XFCE article was not done well in my opinion. It was merely to poke fun at Xubuntu, which I find less buggy and faster than others like the Fedora XFCE Remix. You can add/remove bloat at will in Debian Systems, or start from scratch. (Not that you can't in others I am just saying in either it should really be the same) Ubuntu serves a different purpose in stabilizing the latest and greatest. Debian Sid does indeed work, but it is not targeted as a release, and thus in my opinion is not suitable for distribution.

[expelledboy]

tbh I dont think xubuntu is up to scratch. I like where mint-lxde is going thou.

But really if I was going for nippyness I would go with the new puppy5. I have the latest version frugally installed on my /boot continously, and a script that automatically checks, downloads, and extracts the relevant files off the newest iso.
You can install any ubuntu package, and on a computer like mine it ridiculously fast.

[MasterNetra]

DId you try a fresh install of Ubuntu? The system goes to crap for a number of people when distro upgrading. I always just fresh install instead to be sure.

[Grifulkin]

You will miss out on all the bugs, and breakages.

[oOarthurOo]

You'll miss these friendly forums.

If you like KDE, Mepis is another option. Not sure if it's been mentioned.

If you like Minimal desktops, Crunchbang is starting to make some noise as a pretty great distro.

Basically, you'll miss things being easy. That's why Ubuntu seems a bit slower IMHO... because they do a lot, lot of work behind the scenes to make it a great install for nearly everyone. Debian kind of just gives you the raw ingredients and expects you to enjoy cooking.

[expelledboy]

DId you try a fresh install of Ubuntu? The system goes to crap for a number of people when distro upgrading. I always just fresh install instead to be sure.

Actually this was the first time I did an upgrade. I guess I am just tired of reinstalling every 6 months.

[juancarlospaco]

Whats debain?

[murderslastcrow]

http://debian.org

Named after the first maintainer and his ex-wife. Everything else about it is pretty cheerful, though- the Debian Manifesto, the community involvement- when Debian started up, it was pretty much the only large distribution focused on people and community, not business/science. Ubuntu has done a great job of taking that a step further.

[murderslastcrow]

Also, according to Google, Debain does not exist.

[MisfitI38]

You will miss out on all the bugs, and breakages.

I don't use either system, but Debian is a tried-and-true, high quality system with a good, solid stable branch.
What will you be missing? I honestly don't think you will be missing or regretting much of anything. I believe you will be happy with the move.

[Lucifer The Dark]

What's wrong with asking about Firefox on the Debian forums?

[snowpine]

My question is what will I be missing by moving to debian?

Bugs, crashes, instability, fuzzy animals, and any software applications released since Feb. 2009.

[snowpine]

What's wrong with asking about Firefox on the Debian forums?

They are sick of hearing about it, and in the culture of Debian Forums (which are not as heavily-moderated as Ubuntu Forums), it is considered rude to ask a question like that without using the Search function first. :)

[bug67]

What's wrong with asking about Firefox on the Debian forums?

Debian uses IceWeasel which is a re-branded version of Firefox. Debian refused to bow to Mozilla's trademark requirements so, they made their own brand of firefox and renamed it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iceweasel

While I agree with what they did, I still prefer the real Firefox. I found some incompatibilities with IceWeasel I couldn't live with.

The hardcore Debians I've discused such things with are staunch defenders of their re-branded browser and ripped me a new one when asked "how do I install Firefox?" "Just use IceWeasel, n00b. It's the same thing!" Well, no it's not. ;)

Haven't messed much with Debian since. May do later on though. I'm pretty happy where I'm at. They do make a PPC version though. Not many support PPC anymore.

[pinguy]

Bit of shameless promotion here, but you could give the distro I built ago.
It's a custom built Ubuntu 10.04 LTS with added repository's, tweaks and enhancements that can run as a Live DVD or be installed.

You can find out more about it here. (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1528174)

By the sound of it, it is what you are looking for, a out-of-the-box working Ubuntu.

[XubuRoxMySox]

The new Debian net-installer is sweet and easy! Not nearly as easy as Ubuntu's yet (forward > forward > finish, done!), but easy enough for a careful newbie, I think.

But for most folks who are new to Linux, Ubuntu is "Debian made easy." There is a price for all that ease and simplicity, but to most ordinary desktop users who just need an OS that does all the ordinary stuff (office apps, web browsing, e-mail, photo editing and sharing, etc) right out of the box, then there are some great Debian forks (like Knoppix, Mepis, Ubuntu, Sidux, Crunchbang, etc) that are ready right out of the box.

For example, I built my own Debian with all of the apps and goodies I prefer, my favorite desktop environment (Xfce), and a few applications that I seldom use but want to have installed for those rare occasions when I need a particular tool for a particular job. My "perfect-for-me home-brewed Debian mixture" ended up being nearly identical to Xubuntu!

I really could have saved myself alot of hassle and hours of downloading and stuff if I had just installed Xubuntu. That's all that most distros are anyway: Just someone's mixture of popular applications, tools, wallpapers and themes on a base (like Debian). It turns out that the Xubuntu devs and I have very similar ideas of what apps are best for my needs, tastes, and hardware.

If you switch to Debian you'll miss some of the ease and simplicity of Ubuntu, but you also won't pay the "price" of all that ease and simplicity (loss of speed, less stability IMO). So it's a trade-off. You decide what's important to you and choose accordingly.

The only real major difference between my Xubuntu and my Debian installs is that my Debian Testing is "rolling release," which means I don't have to re-install or upgrade it every six months. It stays (fairly) current. Alot of folks think that's better than a fresh install twice a year, but it has a few disadvantages as well.

Loving them both,
Robin

[Corfy]

You'll miss these friendly forums.

I second that. A big reason why I switched from Debian to Ubuntu was the forums. Debian (at that time, at least) was very much a "Just Google it" or "RTFM". It got on my nerves really quickly, particular since I was new to Linux and didn't know what to Google for to get an answer to my problems.


What's wrong with asking about Firefox on the Debian forums?

Debian and Mozilla are having a bit of a clash. The code for Firefox is open, but the name "Firefox" is trademarked. Well, to make a long story short (and to be honest, I don't understand it entirely), Mozilla and Debian argued about the trademark and what can and cannot be done with the name, so Debian took the Firefox source code and compiled it while renaming it "IceWeasel" (although, now, I guess it is called "IceCat"). It is still the same browser, just rebranded without the Firefox name. But the word "Firefox" is still a very touchy subject with Debian.


The name “IceCat” was coined to show our relationship to the Mozilla Firefox browser. Ice isn't Fire and a Cat isn't a Fox, so it is clearly a different package (we don't want Mozilla blamed for our mistakes, nor cause confusion with their trademarks), but is equally clearly intimately related (of course nearly all of the work comes from the Mozilla foundation effort, so we want to give credit).

[oOarthurOo]

Mozilla and Debian argued about the trademark and what can and cannot be done with the name, so Debian took the Firefox source code and compiled it while renaming it "IceWeasel" (although, now, I guess it is called "IceCat"). It is still the same browser, just rebranded without the Firefox name. But the word "Firefox" is still a very touchy subject with Debian.

Sort of. Part of it was that the logo was trademarked and not free, so Debian didn't want to include it. Firefox said, no, it's everything or nothing. A second more troublesome issue was the Debian wasn't allowed to produce securtiy patches without first getting approval from Mozilla.

So basically, if you're distribution includes firefox, it's because its agreed not to patch the browser without getting approval from mozilla. Which has so far worked fine in practice, but which is ridiculous and offensive to free and open source software in principle.

Source (http://www.internetnews.com/dev-news/article.php/3634591/Firefox-Not-Really-Free.htm)

[NightwishFan]

Arthur is quite correct, and I agree with the decision. It is far more practical, just because Mozilla will not maintain the old version for (currently Debian Lenny) does not mean Debian will not, and it is fine using the name IceWeasel.