The new Debian Linux: Irrelevant?
Summary: People don't notice Debian Linux releases as much as they used to. There's a reason for that, Debian, despite its close relationship to Ubuntu, is becoming irrelevant.
Once upon a time, a new Debian Linux release was a big deal in Linux circles. It still is, but its child, Ubuntu Linux, is the Linux distribution that gets all the headlines. There's a reason for that. Over the years, Debian has become more and more a Linux just for Linux fanatics while the rest of the Linux family has become more end-user friendly.
As I look over the features in the latest Debian, I can see why Debian, while still popular as a building block for other Linux distributions, is no longer as important as it once was. For example, the default Debian distributions won't include any proprietary firmware binary files. While that will be popular with die-hard free software fans, users who just want to use their Wi-Fi hardware and to get the most from their graphics cards won't be happy.
If, as is likely if you're using a laptop or a PC with high-end graphics and you find you're running into hardware problems, the Debian installation program should alert you the problem. That's fine as far as it goes, but the installation routine won't automatically download the missing firmware from the Web. Instead, you'll need to pause the installation while you fetch the missing in action firmware from either the Debian non-free firmware ftp site or the vendor's site.
OK, that's doable if you're a power user. If you're not, it's a confusing pain-in-the-rump.
The theory is that by doing this outraged users will demand that hardware vendors will open-source their device drivers, or, at the least, let Linux developers write open-source drivers for proprietary hardware. In practice, it doesn't work that way.
True, more and more companies are open-sourcing their drivers, such as Broadcom, the Wi-Fi device original equipment manufacturers (OEM). The real driver for this hasn't been free software fans demanding drivers, but Linux-friendly OEMs like Dell demanding open-source drivers.
By doing this, all Debian is doing with this move is satisfying its existing free software base and alienating possible new users. In a similar vein, Debian is continuing the farce of using Iceweasel 3.5.16, an unbranded version of Firefox, and Icedove 3.0.11, an unbranded version of Thunderbird because Mozilla, Firefox and Thunderbird's parent organization, won't let Debian, or its users. muck with these programs trademarked names and logos.
Page 2: [Here's the Good Debian News] »
Here's the Good Debian News
Now, that I have that out of my system, here's the good news. First, as someone who loves to play with operating systems, that Debian now offers a version that will run on top of FreeBSD, one of the BSD Unix operating systems.
That's just me and a few other people whose idea of a good time is tinkering with operating systems though. I think more people will be impressed by the sheer range of open-source software that Debian brings to the distribution. In 6.0, there are more than 10,000 new programs including Google's open-source version of Chrome, Chromium, Ubuntu's Software Center, and the cluster framework Corosync.
Debian also makes it easy to get a specialized version just for your particular job in its newly renamed to Debian Pure Blends
. These include Debian Accessibility, DebiChem, Debian GIS, Debian Multimedia Debian Edu,and Debian Science.
And, as always, no matter what your hardware, Debian probably has a version that will run on it. Debian now supports nine architectures: 32-bit PC / Intel IA-32 (i386), 64-bit PC / Intel EM64T / x86-64 (amd64), Motorola/IBM PowerPC (powerpc), Sun/Oracle SPARC (sparc), MIPS (mips (big-endian) and mipsel (little-endian), Intel Itanium (ia64), IBM S/390 (s390), and ARM EABI (armel).
That's all grand, but as I look at the whole Debian situation, it seems to me that Ubuntu, with its leading the way from X Window to Wayland for Linux's foundation graphics and its new take, Unity, on the Linux desktop is now the ground-breaking Linux distribution that Debian once was. At the same time, Ubuntu is continuing to expand the Linux audience, while Debian continues to be a system that only hard-core Debian Linux fans will use.
Debian is still important. Its developers do a lot of the hard work of mixing and matching basic Linux components and many open-source programs into the strong, reliable foundation that other versions of Linux, such as Ubuntu and MEPIS use. But, while Linux programmers will continue to appreciate Debian, it seems to me that Debian is becoming increasingly irrelevant to the larger user community that Ubuntu, Mint, Fedora, and openSUSE has brought into the Linux fold.
Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.
Talkback
Err...
The problem with Debian is that it never works out of the box
Unlike most Linux distros, Debian Linux take for ever to setup to a point where it is usable. You must "tinker" with pretty much every single config file to get it stable, then you must search the world for drivers ... and that works if you have a clue of what hardware (including chipset brands) you have.
???
My Debian installation did work out of the box.
RE: The new Debian Linux: Irrelevant?
RE: The new Debian Linux: Irrelevant?
Back when I had a PowerMac 8500,
RE: The new Debian Linux: Irrelevant?
Your description of the travails of trying to run Debian weren't true, even before Ubuntu came along and made it easier.
I'm a non-techie who's been running (and installing) Debian for over a decade, and I've found that Debian works very well out of the box -- so long as one takes just a little care to avoid "Win-hardware".
"Win-hardware" used to mean mostly Win-modems and Win-printers -- and even Windows-fans strenuously recommended that such crippled or poorly designed hardware be avoided, regardless of any supposed features or price savings. Today the problematic hardware is most likely a wifi-chip, or some backwards-looking printer brands, and various peripherals that suck-up to proprietary DRM implementations.
But somehow, the lessons of the past are disregarded, and people who should know better choose to give the hardware manufacturers a pass on bad behaviour. I guess some people never learn, or at least lose all perspective when their favourite OS faces a little competition.
For the record, I've been using/installing Windows since Win'95, and Debian since Slink/Potato (circa 2000) and have never found Debian harder to install than Windows, and on standard hardware generally much quicker and easier. Of course, I'm one of those weird people who checks the documentation first -- then does the installation (as the saying goes; "when all else fails -- read the directions").
I have had to replace the odd win-modem, soundcard or wifi-device -- but that's always been a heck of a lot cheaper than even an OEM Windows license.
And Debian has always proven more stable than Windows. In fact so much so that I sometimes run Debian "testing" or "unstable", and still find it runs with less hassle and greater stability than Windows on the same hardware (this is in fact pretty common practice for "desktop" installations). In real-world use, I find that it is Windows that consumes disproportionate amounts of my time with configuring and "tinkering" to get things running smoothly and reliably (and keep it that way).
RE: The new Debian Linux: Irrelevant?
Not work out of the box????
RE: The new Debian Linux: Irrelevant?
Steven
RE: The new Debian Linux: Irrelevant?
RE: The new Debian Linux: Irrelevant?
RE: The new Debian Linux: Irrelevant?
RE: The new Debian Linux: Irrelevant?
RE: Loverock Davidson is irrelevant.
+ 100,000
RE: The new Debian Linux: Irrelevant?
Loverock Davidson's anti-Linux sentiment is irrelevant.
RE: The new Debian Linux: Irrelevant?
ROFL, Loverock comedian at his best.
RE: The new Debian Linux: Irrelevant?
That's why k-root and the other root servers don't run UNIX/Linux/BSD, then run Windows, right?
That's why IIS is outpacing Apache as the web server of choice, 'cause Linux sucks, right?
That's why embedded systems are using the Windows kernel vs the Linux one, right?
That's why the CiscoIOS runs more like the Windows command line than a Linux one, right?
If you fail to see my points above, well, then you just plain fail, much like Windows does.
RE: The new Debian Linux: Irrelevant?
RE: The new Debian Linux: Irrelevant?
hmmm, linux has a larger install base than ever. your observation is brilliant!