• UnfortunateShort@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    12 days ago

    Compared to Arch(-based): Accesing the latest packages. It’s not impossible, especially if you go for Debian testing repos, but it’s definitely extra work.

    Compared to special-purpose distros (i.e. gaming, portable, high security/privacy, pen-testing): Whatever their special purpose is will usually be harder to achieve.

    Compared to huge corpo distros (SUSE/Fedora and derivatives): Ease of more intricate setups and maybe some security testing.

    Compared to Ubuntu: Paying a corporation to not withhold security patches from you.

  • thejevans@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    14 days ago

    You can’t have your entire system configuration in a repository of plain text files, which has lots of advantages, but it’s not worth caring about unless you feel excited to get into it.

  • lambalicious@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    12 days ago

    If you are using Gnome distros: you can feel exactly what it feels like getting back to working in a restricted, overhyped, overbranded environment like Windows.

    If you are using Ubuntu: you can get advertising during your system’s software upgrades. No, really.

    If you are using Arch: you can post aroudn the internet saying you use Arch btw.

    Depending on the distro, you can use some alternative software stacks, but that’s mostly the backend (eg.: systemd versus openRC, Apache vs Nginx, X vs Wayland); most “desktop app” level is mostly the same for each desktop environment, is kinda the point.

    • exu@feditown.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      13 days ago

      One could compile pacman and all the build tools if they really wanted to.