Skip Navigation

Ironically Ubuntu is more popular…

What’s Debian based on again? I think it was some earlier variant of Ubuntu

/s

36

You're viewing a single thread.

36 comments
  • Debian was first in that line. Here's the Linux family tree

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1b/Linux_Distribution_Timeline.svg

    • lol I know :)

      • sorry, missed the /s, but figured the tree was still worth seeing for some.

        #echo "" > $1; echo "Debutu"

    • Whoever collected this data is a real one

    • Yep, Debian was (is) a disaster to configure graphics with modern hardware. It was pure open source (even blocked firefox as the logo was copyright protected). They opened up with a non-free repo for hardware support, but already lost the 'market share' on the desktop to Ubuntu (and the load of forks with just a different windoemanager as default... instead of adding a desktop selection on install). Also Ubuntu is offered a lot as option on new hardware.

      With snap I'm guessing users migrate back... (a very few at least)

      • Yep, Debian was (is) a disaster to configure graphics with modern hardware.

        Hasn't been the case for years. Perhaps even a decade, from what I recall. Just check the "nonfree" option in the installer, and you'll get all the drivers you need. It's not any harder to set up than Ubuntu these days.

      • Honestly Debian was one of the few that still kept a strong stance on freedom. Its sad that they went the opposite direction. I wish that they would of just broke the non-free into firmware and apps like they have now and then provided two isos. They could have a simple paragraph explaining free software with two links.

        • Same feeling, although on some systems you need the non-free firmware to complete the installation. No screen or network is a tad annoying when installing. ;)

      • Thanos snap those nerds straight to arch

You've viewed 36 comments.