The difference with ubuntu and debian?
- Thread starter Minmeo
- Start date
drmike
100% Tier-1 Gogent
Ubuntu still is based on Debian. I think every release/derivative.
Ubuntu has more user friendly desktop style stuff that supposedly just works. Debian is more of the DIY roll it yourself.
I stopped using Ubuntu when they started acting odd, Amazon ads, Google search stuff and GUI with odd indexing of things. Ubuntu got too bulky, higher spec also.
Not a huge difference between them and most tutorials will work on both. The big difference is software in the repositories. Ubuntu seems to be more recent/cutting edge. Debian lags from release to release unless you live on the edge/testing/compile your stuff from source.
Ubuntu has more user friendly desktop style stuff that supposedly just works. Debian is more of the DIY roll it yourself.
I stopped using Ubuntu when they started acting odd, Amazon ads, Google search stuff and GUI with odd indexing of things. Ubuntu got too bulky, higher spec also.
Not a huge difference between them and most tutorials will work on both. The big difference is software in the repositories. Ubuntu seems to be more recent/cutting edge. Debian lags from release to release unless you live on the edge/testing/compile your stuff from source.
wlanboy
Content Contributer
I would say that it is about:
1. Release cycles.
Ubuntu is releasing a new version every 6 months. Only LTS versions get relaesed every 2 years.
Debian is releasing a new version every 2 years.
2. The installer
During install Ubuntu is creating one user which can use sudo.
The whole thing has seven steps: the selection of language, time zone, and keyboard, partitioning, creating a user account, and confirmation of your choices. Thats the reason for the "beginners friendly" tag.
During install Debian is creating one user and is asking for the root password.
The installer does offer quite a lot of options. But the latest graphical installer is similar to the one of Ubuntu (in the number of steps).
3. Packages
The Debian package managment allows you to choose your own level of risk and innovation.
If you want the very latest software, you can use Unstable - yup that means problems.
You can choose Stable for well-tested software supported by constant security updates.
Each Debian repository is further subdivided into main (free software), contrib (free software dependent on other none free software) and non-free (software free for the download, but having a non-free license).
Ubuntu's repositories are organized by support status,
Ubuntu's repositories consist of Main (software supported by Canonical, Ubuntu's commercial arm),
Universe (software supported by the Ubuntu community),
Restricted (proprietary drivers), and
Multiverse (software restricted by copyright or legal issues).
4. Community
The Ubuntu forums are more accessible to newcomers (stupid questions allowed), while Debian forums are more technical and closed (don't be a woman, don't say something like "but with windows ....", and don't ask anything that is part of a man page).
Don't forget that Ubuntu is a branch of Debian. They use the upstream of Debian but are adding additional stuff (Cononical) to it.
Ubuntu itself does have some meta-packages like "dovecot-postfix" which do a great part of the configuration. So it is simple to use and you can change whatever you want.
Something that you could be killed for in Debian - if you would suggest such a package.
1. Release cycles.
Ubuntu is releasing a new version every 6 months. Only LTS versions get relaesed every 2 years.
Debian is releasing a new version every 2 years.
2. The installer
During install Ubuntu is creating one user which can use sudo.
The whole thing has seven steps: the selection of language, time zone, and keyboard, partitioning, creating a user account, and confirmation of your choices. Thats the reason for the "beginners friendly" tag.
During install Debian is creating one user and is asking for the root password.
The installer does offer quite a lot of options. But the latest graphical installer is similar to the one of Ubuntu (in the number of steps).
3. Packages
The Debian package managment allows you to choose your own level of risk and innovation.
If you want the very latest software, you can use Unstable - yup that means problems.
You can choose Stable for well-tested software supported by constant security updates.
Each Debian repository is further subdivided into main (free software), contrib (free software dependent on other none free software) and non-free (software free for the download, but having a non-free license).
Ubuntu's repositories are organized by support status,
Ubuntu's repositories consist of Main (software supported by Canonical, Ubuntu's commercial arm),
Universe (software supported by the Ubuntu community),
Restricted (proprietary drivers), and
Multiverse (software restricted by copyright or legal issues).
4. Community
The Ubuntu forums are more accessible to newcomers (stupid questions allowed), while Debian forums are more technical and closed (don't be a woman, don't say something like "but with windows ....", and don't ask anything that is part of a man page).
Don't forget that Ubuntu is a branch of Debian. They use the upstream of Debian but are adding additional stuff (Cononical) to it.
Ubuntu itself does have some meta-packages like "dovecot-postfix" which do a great part of the configuration. So it is simple to use and you can change whatever you want.
Something that you could be killed for in Debian - if you would suggest such a package.
Aldryic C'boas
The Pony
The best way to get a grasp of the difference is to ask a question in either's community forums.
Debian response: "Let us teach you how this works"
Ubuntu response: "Run this script that makes everything work again. Don't ask me why it works"
Debian response: "Let us teach you how this works"
Ubuntu response: "Run this script that makes everything work again. Don't ask me why it works"
I've always chosen debian over ubuntu, ubuntu isn't as light as debian is which is always a minus, if you ask me. As for the tutorials, most ubuntu tutorials will work on debian and vise versa, they both use the bash shell and they both have apt-get.
Debian = one of the original Linux distribs....long time between updates. Packages tend to be older.
Ubuntu = built on Debian...faster updates. Packages tend to be more up to date.
Ubuntu started as a desktop OS although now they offer a server version.
Ubuntu = built on Debian...faster updates. Packages tend to be more up to date.
Ubuntu started as a desktop OS although now they offer a server version.
Last edited by a moderator:
nunim
VPS Junkie
Sounds like the cPanel forums to me. For me the main difference is that Debian packages are much older, so if you need anything cutting edge you need to build it or use an alternate repo like DotDeb. There's some other quirks like Java and Iceweasel but it's mostly the same, much like Canada vs. America.
Aldryic C'boas
The Pony
Honestly, if you have no intention of building anything and would rather just fully rely on repos, Ubuntu is the better route to take. I hear the Ice(weasel|dove) arguement quite a bit.. and while it's rather harsh, my typical response is "Do you not know how to install software on your OS?" Even if you didn't look at the changelogs and realize that the Debian team gives much more love to their modifications of the Mozilla code than Ubuntu does (with the same source - the reason Debian won't use the Mozilla/Firefox logos is due to how the logo is licensed) - it's less than a couple of minutes work to grab the latest .tgz of Firefox and install it yourself.
At the end of the day, it takes a simple question - Are you comfortable grabbing a .tar.gz packaged application, and correctly adding it to your app suite? If not, Ubuntu is the choice for you.
At the end of the day, it takes a simple question - Are you comfortable grabbing a .tar.gz packaged application, and correctly adding it to your app suite? If not, Ubuntu is the choice for you.
Debian is somewhat of a techie's distro, though less so than Gentoo or maybe Nixos.
Ubuntu has more creature comforts and tries to be more corporate friendly and likes to do stuff like install spyware/adware. I've been at some companies that used Ubuntu. Ubuntu isn't terrible but I get the impression that the reason management picked it was they were simply more comfortable using something put out by another corporate guy.
I run Debian on servers but in the past have found it a bit limited for the desktop, so I've been running Fedora on desktops. I don't see much reason to prefer Ubuntu to Fedora. For that matter, for a server OS supported by a company, there's always Red Hat, which I like better than Canonical these days. In reality nowadays, most people who want the corporate desktop experience while still wanting to be hipsters use Macintoshes, so Ubuntu just seems like a cheapskate substitute.
I had a bad feeling about Debian (including Ubuntu) for a while, because of an incident where they messed up the security of the system random number generator around 2008, causing a lot of insecure SSL certificates on the web. That's far enough in the past though that it doesn't bother me any more. I still sometimes entertain private conspiracy theories about how it might have happened, but I haven't seen any external sign of it being anything but a dumb error that mostly just makes me more suspicious of C programs in general.
These days I like Debian enough that I might install it as a desktop OS instead of Fedora on my next PC. Nixos and Guix also interest me but those are even nerdier.
Ubuntu has more creature comforts and tries to be more corporate friendly and likes to do stuff like install spyware/adware. I've been at some companies that used Ubuntu. Ubuntu isn't terrible but I get the impression that the reason management picked it was they were simply more comfortable using something put out by another corporate guy.
I run Debian on servers but in the past have found it a bit limited for the desktop, so I've been running Fedora on desktops. I don't see much reason to prefer Ubuntu to Fedora. For that matter, for a server OS supported by a company, there's always Red Hat, which I like better than Canonical these days. In reality nowadays, most people who want the corporate desktop experience while still wanting to be hipsters use Macintoshes, so Ubuntu just seems like a cheapskate substitute.
I had a bad feeling about Debian (including Ubuntu) for a while, because of an incident where they messed up the security of the system random number generator around 2008, causing a lot of insecure SSL certificates on the web. That's far enough in the past though that it doesn't bother me any more. I still sometimes entertain private conspiracy theories about how it might have happened, but I haven't seen any external sign of it being anything but a dumb error that mostly just makes me more suspicious of C programs in general.
These days I like Debian enough that I might install it as a desktop OS instead of Fedora on my next PC. Nixos and Guix also interest me but those are even nerdier.
