[nu11ptr]

I really like Pop Os. I've always liked Debian descended distros, and prior to this I was using Ubuntu. While I like it, I always found a lot of rough edges esp. when it came to proprietary drivers, etc. where things didn't always work without some tweaking. Pop Os on the other hand seems to "just work" - it is like a polished version of Ubuntu with a nice selection of apps in the Pop Shop. Theme is pretty nice as well as a bonus.

[thisiswrongggg]

I'm curious. With all these debian-based distros, why people don't just use debian? I mean it has to be sturdier than the downstream distros.

[npteljes]

One of the things, for me, was that Debian's releases were confusing. Ubuntu had a clear schedule, aligned to a calendar, with a clear out of life policy.

The second thing was that I couldn't figure out my way from debian.org, to the relevant ISO to download. There's just so many options, scattered explanations, I felt overwhelmed by the site and couldn't figure it out reliably.

The third thing is the out of box experience. Every major Debian descendant has this mentioned in the articles that compare them. Ubuntu is like a refined, user friendly Debian. Mint further polishes Ubuntu. Elementary is designed for newbies and to have excellent OOTB experience. And so on.

Fourth thing, that Debian Stable seems to be behind in version numbers, and Debian Testing seems to be not stable enough. Maybe these are not true, but they haven't inspired confidence in me either.

Fifth, Debian came with some proprietary things off by default, so no WIFI on my laptop, no MP3, bluetooth, other minor inconveniences. I love open source, but I'm not a purist, and I wanted to make use of my computer first, and improve on it later.

After Ubuntu pushing their current in-house bullshit again (snaps this time), and Mint behaving weird on my main computer for some reason (maybe the multiple release upgrades), I took the plunge into Debian after some research, and ended up on using Debian Testing with KDE. So far, the experience has been good, but this really feels like a Linux enthusiast's distro, where I had to look up things on the Internet, because the installed just haven't explained anything - me, with 10+ years of Linux experience, ending up with installing a system that won't boot into the graphical desktop, despite selecting the KDE option in the installer!

[dm319]

Debian is a pain! I just tried installing it on a laptop. During installation it points out it can't find a wifi driver and do I have it to hand? I didn't and I don't know where to find it. It says I can use ethernet, but the ethernet wasn't close to me at the time and laptop's battery was shot so I couldn't move. I proceed without internet. I google how to install non-free firmware after the fact, and find that there is an app in the repository. Once the install is done, I shut it down and move it to a room with ethernet. We boot up, plug it in and get internet! But for some reason I am not attached to any software repositories apart from those on an install CD/DVD. I don't know what has happened, but I assume that my lack of internet during install meant I don't have apt sources properly configured. I considered googling how to add these, but instead, I said goodbye to the early 2000s gnome 2 theme, shut it down and tried another debian-derived distro that has all the advantages of debian, a beautiful modern theme, and I don't spend hours googling things I don't know.

[nix23]

https://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/unofficial/non-free/cd-in...

[fsflover]

Debian recently voted to add proprietary firmware, so your devices should work by default.

[jkepler]

What are you referring to? Are Debian's default installations going to include the non-free repositories, which aren't officially part of Debian?

[RunSet]

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33055100

[jkepler]

Thanks.

[sliken]

I use Ubuntu because it is relatively current at release, has a very regular schedule, and my preferred LTS releases have 5 years of updates.

I occasionally talk to a Debian user. Ask how they handle their long term Debian use. Which usually takes them several minutes to describe. XYZ from stable, ABC from unstable, track the latest with foo from testing, and bar from backports. Basically they end up with a custom setup, unlike any other on the planet, and that hasn't been tested.

LTS on the other hand does get testing, generally I just apt install the packages I need, and then do-release upgrade every 2 years. LTS is popular enough that generally if I google the problem there's a quick fix, and a large fraction of LTS users don't seem to customize their repos to the degree that seems common on Debian.

[tlamponi]

I don't think there's a single answer to that, but I got a few points that may be the more prominent ones, in no particular order:

a) Their (now changing) stance against unfree firmware files. This made the default adverdised installer fail most laptop installations due to the WIFI firmware not being available, so no internet to pull down the required packages to make it work. There were unofficial ISOs, but they were hard to find and so a frustrating experience if you didn't know about it. Same, but not as worse with other unfree stuff, like NVidia drivers, you are required to enable the non-free repos, which makes totally sense if you check it out more closely but still a bump in the road for users new(er) to Linux or only used Debian derivatives that often have a stance that is (relatively) less freedom oriented. As hinted, the firmware situation recently changed and will get better with the next major release next year.

b) It's more universal and flexible to go in various direction, so it comes with a less opinionated out-of-the-box experience, for the better or worse (depending on your preferences). For example, Ubuntu provides a Server and a Desktop edition, and then all the semi-official Desktop spins for KDE, XFCE, ..., but Debian doesn't you can get it to move in either direction quite easily once you grasp its basics, but that naturally still is an overhead compared to just pulling a preconfigured "ready to fly" version ISO.

c) It is definitively is sturdier, but due to their policies guaranteeing that it's also less bleeding edge, well at least if you use the stable release. You can run the Debian Sid version (unstable), but the project doesn't want to promote that to inexperienced users. FWIW, I run that on my laptops since years and got an excellent experience. It's a rolling edge version of Debian, fresh as Arch, but I just align a bit better with Debian (plus develop on it at work).

There are surely some more, but those where the biggest three popping into my head.

The great thing about Debian, they got quite a healthy relationship to most of their derivatives. Which could IMO only happen due to not being run by a major company or the like, but 100% community based. While that sometimes makes for slow turning mills, but still (or maybe exactly because of that) an excellent and safe foundation for their users, be it direct ones or indirect through derivatives.

[EFreethought]

My info might be out of date, but I think for a long time Debian was not including some audio codecs like MP3 because there are some patents around it. I think there are some proprietary drivers like NVidia that are also excluded.

I think the Debian distro has always targeted/attracted free software purists.

[anotherhue]

You’re correct but fun fact: MP3’s patents expired

[bananamerica]

Debian never seemed to correctly recognize my wireless cards in multiple machines, even with the non-free ISOs

[fsflover]

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33055100

[bananamerica]

I understand but nothing changes for me, I already used the non-free ISOs. The only difference is that they will put the non-free ISOs at the front and the regular in the back. The ISOs will be the same.

But thanks ;)

[qbasic_forever]

Yep I've had the exact same experience. I love that pop is setup out of the box to work well with flatpaks and flathub too--I rarely have to mess with out of date debs, the pain of snaps, etc. The gnome extensions they pack in for tiling windows, adding desktop icons, are fantastic too. It just works.

[ekianjo]

The fact that they include flatpaks together with normal packages is confusing though. They appear just the same in the pop_OS store and there are many duplicates because of that.

Very inconsistent behavior for installation: flatpaks require no specific rights but normal packages require sudo password. Not a good UX in that regard.

[nu11ptr]

While I would prefer more debs personally, the flatpaks are clearly marked as such in the store

[tehbeard]

The confusion is there's no info on what's different between them presented to the user.

I know vaguely that flatpak is "like docker" in terms of wrapping dependencies.

I have no clue how that translates to missing features of compatibility issues with other apps.

Even knowing which is more up to date isn't shown. Or why i should pick one over the other.

The multiple packaging types confounded my efforts to debug an issue I had with VLC, as i initially thought it was a flatpak permissions problem.. No evidence, just hearsay by what i'd seen of flatpak in general online.

[diffeomorphism]

Does it matter? People that care know and people that don't know don't need to care.

[tehbeard]

Yes it does? If it doesn't matter, why are there two or even 3 options at times for the same software with little detail as to why?

And if the packaging difference does matter (as it did for my vlc issue, one solution only worked for the deb), then an explanation for newbies should be given as to the general expectations for each package type.

Or should I just "git gud" and go digging through ppa/flathub? mailing lists to find a 2013 reply to a post?

[ekianjo]

Not at all. Some are, some are not. (I am using Pop_OS on one of my computers, so I know).

[pmontra]

No snaps is good but

1. Slack is a snap. Do you have to run it in the browser? I don't know if desktop sharing works well there, it's been years since I only used their app (Electron?)

2. Is flatpack optional or are there some mandatory flatpack apps that are part of the system? I'd like a deb only system.

3. Contrary to some of us I don't want to use a tiling window manager. Can I keep using my heavily customized Gnome Shell or do I have to use whatever System 76 created for Pop_OS?

[qbasic_forever]

Flatpak is optional, it's just setup out of the box so if you want to flatpak install stuff it just works. Their app center also shows flatpaks but has a drop down where you can pick either the deb or flatpak version if both are available.

And the tiling extension is off by default. It's just a little toggle in the (very nice) settings dialog to turn it on or off. You can totally uninstall it too as it's just a regular gnome extension (and you can even install it right now on non-pop gnome 3 systems).

[czx4f4bd]

1. There's a Slack flatpak based on the .deb distribution. You could also install the .deb directly from Slack.

2. I'm not sure how mandatory flatpak is. I suspect it's optional, but I'd suggest testing removal on a non-essential install before committing to it.

3. The tiling feature is completely optional and can be disabled easily in the settings.

[giancarlostoro]

I'm always looking for a "developer" distro, and POP_OS! feels to be the only one that fits that niche for me.