They say debian is free and has its promise, but Arch has like 2-4 maintainers?
In my experience, Debian has been way simpler, more intuitive, more stable, and cleaner. Start there. If you need the absolute latest bleeding edge drivers or software, consider arch, then probably just run it on Debian because the software is still available, just not preinstalled.
deleted by creator
If you know vaguely what you’re doing or are willing to learn, you can go with whatever and it’ll be fine.
Personally not a big fan of debian because they tend to be slower and more conservative on updates. Arch is a bit more technical, but very customizable.
I’m personally a big fan of Fedora. Software updated quickly enough to have all the bells and whistles, slow enough to not get cut by bleeding edge software.
Gentoo is where you learn the most about Linux and software in general.
Long time gentoo advocate(/fanboy) here, and so, it stings a little to say this, but, there are ways to use gentoo that do not have you learn as much about your system as, say, e.g. CRUX, KISS/Carbs, LFS(?), starting with just a busybox and kernel, Exherbo, or even many ways of using slackware [and several other suggestions yet, but gotta cut the list short somewhere].
Gentoo’s very conveniently wrapped up with portage. So conveniently, you can be forgiven for lingering in the convenience and not venturing deeper into what the convenience wraps around. It’s not a thick opaque plastic wrap like some distros that try hard to lower the entry bar, but it is still convenient. … Conveniently availing advanced fidelity of choice over what you’re installing, conveniently managing complexity in simplicity, but ultimately a convenience trap still none the less. … Many Gentoo users look like uneducated yokels in flying saucers, compared to those who actually do compile their software themselves (they run
make), rather than those who have emerge do it for them. [Or an even more extreme example, we’re like anyone using an LLM voice assistant.] As in: We’re not superior skilled savvy sysadmin, we just have better tools.And why do the effort of learning to become better, when the machine does it for you.
But then, with gentoo, you do still have the choice. Gentoo is all about choice.
One can try say same for any distro, and that’s true, for all being (mostly) Free Software (“Opensource”) and so can study (freedom1) it to whatever depth your curiosity takes you, but, Arch does try take some of your choice away from you, not the freedom to study it, but in that it insists it have the freedom to bite you. [ Though, there be ways to mitigate that ]. Debian (or Devuan), Gentoo, Suse, and others, let you opt-in to the fast lane. Arch seem to be screaming “COME WITH US, FAST AS WE CAN!!!” and leaving little room to hear anything about taking arch to a slow lane.
It was mostly sarcastic suggestion, but as you said, you can hit the ground running with Gentoo nowadays very quickly, and go back and revisit every part of it and play around with it, and learn about everything later.
I think it’s Ubuntu that’s slow, while Debian as its base is smaller and faster?
No, Debian is typically quite a bit older than even the Ubuntu LTS. E.g. they currently still don’t ship a Nvidia driver that supports the 50 series GPUs.
Performance differences between distros tend to be negligible. Unless you have a specific use case and a distro specifically tuned for that, you will hardly notice any difference.
Slower on updates, not slow to run. Slower on updates is referring to how it takes longer for new features / software to be shipped out for you to download. Debian usually prioritizes machines that chug along for a long time without anything breaking, rather than adding new stuff
You’re right that it’s not slow to run. It is small and fast
But fast on security updates when running on stable
Ubuntu is based off the testing version of Debian, so they have newer software versions
Is your hardware ten years old or more?
Do you want a system made up of software that is on average 3 years old?
Do you want absolutely ridiculous stability for the uptime memes?
Are you a fan of the idea that every design decision should be done by a committee of theoretically democratically chosen developers but is actually just whoever wants the job because there is never any real transparency or motion about when the meetings are, much less when elections are?
Does the idea of your operating system being compatible not because its good but because it’s just the largest base thanks to corporate investment make you moist?
Then pick Debian.
If you answered no to literally any of those options then go ahead and pick an Arch flavor, or Arch itself.
You mean Cachy OS? Yeah, I’ve heard of that, might choose it, I dunno yet.
Linux '26er here. I tried a few and CachyOS is now my jam. I’m way too new to offer true insight, but as a new convert, Cachy has good video/gaming support and all the core features I need to keep exploring. 100% recommend a day or two to try it out.
I’m also fairly new, and one big benefit of CachyOS is the sensible defaults. You get to start with the modern way of doing things instead of having to discover them slowly.
microinstead ofnanofor exampleI run Cachyos (KDE), for 10 months now, on a 13 year old HP workstation. Daily updates. Best distro I’ve used (previously used Mint, SuSE, Debian, Ubuntu), wouldn’t go back to any of the others.
But is it catchy?
I’ve never used it but recommend it to newcomers because they all seem to like it.
I know its tough to see through all the noise. Everyone tells you what you should do and to not listen to the others. But what I want you to focus on is that they are all nobodies. Randos you don’t know and never will. But I’m Magnum PI, you know me, so listen to me and forget what everyone else has said.
Go with Debian.
Hell yeah, I knew Magnum ran Deb
Hell yeah brother
Teach good debugging practices early
Debian user that reccomends it. I don’t game or need latest gizmos. I want and have a computer that is very reliable and maintenance free.
I use Arch btw. Arch is amazing, but you need to be willing to learn a few things. No shame in wanting an easier distro that just works.
If you have to ask, you definitely don’t want Arch
I use both, debian on servers and old machines, arch on my desktop. Arch being rough is way overblown in my experience, the install script makes it straightforward to setup and it’s been pretty much painless since I switched to it two years ago, I had experience with debian before that. Both arch and debian have fantastic documentation available.
Debian and derivatives, in my experience, are really well supported so that’s a plus. Age of packages has never really bothered me and cases where I want bleeding edge there’s options for that.
Both are solid options and I don’t think you’ll be upset either way, if you can I’d try both.
I’ve been a Debian guy for a long time for one reason, stability. I don’t game a lot, but haven’t had an issue in years, my son uses arch and games way more than I do, but he also has to fix a lot more stuff that updates seem to break.
If you are under 30 I almost want to encourage Arch as you’ll be forced to learn a bit more over time and learning is never a bad thing. If you might game some, but value a rock solid system, go Debian.
If you want your system to be reliable, stable and in essence boring: Debian.
If you want to be hands-on, on the bleeding edge and updating daily: Arch.
Debian is chosen for Satellites because it is “stable”, that is it doesn’t do major changes like changing the Kernel.
Arch isn’t for beginners, but it’s a rolling release distro that’s nice and simple but powerful.
You do have the option though. I run LMDE7, and installed a 7.0-prempt kernel yesterday because I felt that I was seeing too much stuttering in 3d games. I installed it from my package manager which already had debian Backports turned on.
I like Arch. It’s a rolling release distro with a nice community. However there is no installer. You have to install it by hand. That’s why many people who never touched Arch themselves keep telling it’s “too hard to install”. Actually the process is well documented. You’ll need like an hour for it, but in return you get a system, that’s slim and perfectly tailored to your needs.
https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Installation_guide
However, if you just want to do casual things like browsing the web, debian is absolutely fine. But be aware, that the packages are antique. Also I never survived a dist-upgrade once in my live. There was always broken configs afterwards.
Neither. Void or OpenBSD. Not hating on SystemD, but I aint lovin it…
If you want to go with bsd, just make sure your hardware is supported
Why is this a issue btw? I get that porting Linux drivers also requires manpower. But no wrapper or automatic patcher chain for them?
