Kudos to Martin Krafft for writing his book. Many dream but few ever get it together...
That said, I spent most of 2005 running Debian Unstable and Debian Testing on different systems and ended up finding both overrated and generally a disappointmennt. Debian was too demanding of time and needed seemingly endless fiddling around and careful management. It also took a lot of time to set up, though admittedly that is a one-off when an installation is still fresh. More important, the Debian developer commun
> I do find it a little odd that he should recommend that new users try Ubuntu > rather than Debian. One is tempted to ask: what's the problem whereby they > can't use Debian, then?
I try to answer this question in the introduction of my book, section "Target audience". You can obtain the first chapter from http://debiansystem.info/about [debiansystem.info] . Now I hope you guys aren't going to kill my server.
One thing I did not specify -- as I did not mention Ubuntu in the introduction: I recommend Ubuntu to new users of Linux because in my experience, most of them were just that: new users who wanted to read their email, author documents, and use their laptops power management at night. Sure, all of this is very possible with Debian, but IME not really for the newbie.
Here, Ubuntu has done a good job at making Debian more accessible. That is all. And being accessible to the Linux newbie just isn't "Debian's plac
I would not recommend Ubuntu to someone who has the potential to climb the curve quickly. And of the dozens of people I've switched to Linux/Ubuntu in the past months, most have already switched to Debian
I used Debian for over two years. In the end i was always running unstable, because the stable packages were simply to old. As you might know, to keep unstable up to date requires ~200MB to download a week (because an update of a tiny library can generate a huge download of all packages which depend on tha
Great book, too bad about the software (Score:5, Interesting)
That said, I spent most of 2005 running Debian Unstable and Debian Testing on different systems and ended up finding both overrated and generally a disappointmennt. Debian was too demanding of time and needed seemingly endless fiddling around and careful management. It also took a lot of time to set up, though admittedly that is a one-off when an installation is still fresh. More important, the Debian developer commun
Re:Great book, too bad about the software (Score:2, Informative)
> rather than Debian. One is tempted to ask: what's the problem whereby they
> can't use Debian, then?
I try to answer this question in the introduction of my book, section "Target audience". You can obtain the first chapter from http://debiansystem.info/about [debiansystem.info] . Now I hope you guys aren't going to kill my server.
Re:Great book, too bad about the software (Score:3, Informative)
I recommend Ubuntu to new users of Linux because in my experience, most of them were just that: new users who wanted to read their email, author documents, and use their laptops power management at night. Sure, all of this is very possible with Debian, but IME not really for the newbie.
Here, Ubuntu has done a good job at making Debian more accessible. That is all. And being accessible to the Linux newbie just isn't "Debian's plac
Re:Great book, too bad about the software (Score:1)
I used Debian for over two years. In the end i was always running unstable, because the stable packages were simply to old. As you might know, to keep unstable up to date requires ~200MB to download a week (because an update of a tiny library can generate a huge download of all packages which depend on tha