- cross-posted to:
- technology
- cross-posted to:
- technology
Some mix of wrong and right, the exact proportions of which I’ll leave as an exercise to the reader.
Some mix of wrong and right, the exact proportions of which I’ll leave as an exercise to the reader.
As an inexperienced user, I can tell you that Debian is way harder to use than most people think. Out of the box, the distro is pretty bare ones. I’m having a blast using an Arch based distro, but on Debian I had to do everything manually. Stable is freaking old, and Unstable has lots of limitations, Docker for example is a true pain.
Ubuntu, Mint, Zorin, POP OS, are way better than Debian for users like me.
Red hat users would feel right at home, right?
Reading this, I wonder if we talk about the same Debian 😆
“I hate configuring Linux distros which is why I use arch btw”
Arch based, not the same thing. Crystal Linux bundles everything out of the box, so noobs like me don’t have to do anything.
how???
I ll give you old but not at all unstable, wonder what instability have you found in LTS.
A lot of people (incorrectly) equate “stable” with “bug-free”. So conversely, having bugs would be “unstable”.
I think he meant: Stable is freaking old. Unstable has a lot of limitations.
Indeed, I edited my comment to better convey my point. Thanks for being so good at reading comprehension.
Pretty sure the whole statement is
I don’t think they’re saying Debian LTS is unstable.
Exactly what my bad wording meant to say. Thank you for your extraordinary reading comprehension.
Really? It works for me in my homelab
RHEL costs $600 a year. Its users can cope with debian easily.