Debian vs Ubuntu
Debian vs Ubuntu
Almost everywhere I travel, I notice Ubuntu being referred to as a Debian release. Debian started in 1993 by Ian Murdoch, while Ubuntu emerged in 2004 through Mark Shutleworth. Ubuntu is based on Debian. From the beginning, Ubuntu has taken its own path, becoming more commercial and including proprietary software. Thus, one can say Ubuntu is connected to Debian and that statement holds true. Calling it a Debian distribution isn’t accurate. Those who have experimented with both will see installing Debian can be frustrating, whereas Ubuntu is relatively straightforward. If someone has used both for years, they’ll notice differences in reliability. In summary, Ubuntu can be unstable and prone to bugs, particularly when using versions other than the Long Term Support (LTS) releases of any 'Buntu' variants like Kubuntu, Lubuntu, or Xubuntu. Debian, once set up, offers exceptional stability, making it a favored choice for servers. I’ve added chronological links that highlight their distinctions, helping beginners understand which distros suit newcomers best. I hope this clarifies why they don’t fall into the same category. Why does Linus Torvalds dislike using Debian or Ubuntu Linux? Debian vs. Ubuntu: Which One Should You Choose? Debian vs Ubuntu – Key Differences and Similarities in 2020 The Ultimate Showdown 6 Top Linux Distributions Beyond Ubuntu or Debian Pick what you prefer, the first priority is to enjoy the process! The second is to move away from Windows—meaning someone who isn’t ready to spend money unnecessarily.
I believe the meaning isn't clear to me. Most of Ubuntu's code, excluding the GUI, matches Debian's, and as long as they use the same package manager, it should be a Debian distribution.
Disagree on that, installing Debian is quite easy for anyone with a basic idea of what an operating system is. Not as easy as Ubuntu but really not much harder at all. Yeah, try installing Sid... Ubuntu doesn't call their non-LTS distributions "unstable" but they are the same type of release as Sid, whereas "stable" Debian is to be compared with LTS releases of Ubuntu. There's still some stability advantage just by virtue of Debian typically sticking with slightly older packages but it's not as large as you make it sound. This was just an off-hand remark Torvalds made almost 15 years ago about an experience he had even prior to that, anything you could have gathered from that is at the very least painfully out of date. Realistically people like Torvalds just don't care what distribution they use, if they try one and are comfortable with it they'll just stick with it because there's no reason for them to switch. I'm not sure what this has to do with the topic at hand...?
The way to check if a distribution is genuinely Debian or a modified version is the acclaimed script SMXI by h20. Many of you were likely still in primary school when the debate started in late 2009 and continued into 2010, making it hard for some to remember details about Ian Murdock or his unclear passing. Try it yourself—smxi is a highly valuable tool for tweaking Debian after installation, not just for Ubuntu!
It was determined it was a suicide, a conclusion that aligns with what you'd see in the Debian mailing lists.
Great attempt—police always tell the truth! Moving off-topic won’t help, @10leej. Let me know if anyone else thinks smxi could fit your setup! I’m enjoying this, what about you?
Thanks for the helpful feedback and insights from @LloydLynx. I've had some experience with Debian Sid distros like Aptosod and Siduction. Upgrading after trying new software that caused issues was definitely a learning experience, though it was challenging. Today I mostly stick with Testing, especially with antiX. I used the smxi script to adjust the nVidia graphics, kernel settings, remove language packs, and switched repos for better performance. More details here: https://smxi.org