Arch or Debian for laptop

[Art_X]

Gentoo on my laptop is really annoying now, due to the fact that is takes hours to compile some of the updates, namely the new 4.10.3 KDE updates as well as libreoffice, plus it stresses the poor thing out.

On my other systems its not an issue as they have the power to configure the packages, I have googled the pros and cons between the two, and a lot of people say to use one over the other, I have tried arch and it seems good, but the advise seems to be titled towards debian.

Should I just go with debian or try arch again, sometimes too much choice is not always a good thing

[Haggis Veteran]

I use Debian on my laptop, just switched to it last week

I wanted a nice stable distro that did not require me fixing a load of problems that seems to happen with the bleeding edge Distros

so in my Opinion i would choose Debian

Arch i hear is a lot more slimmed down? but more hands on

[REM2000]

i always go with Debian as everything is well tested and it's easy to get a system together, plus i like the plain cut down UI.

I think it will come down to a balance of what you want, something thats really customization a la Arch or something simple.

[fusi0n]

I would also go with Debian.. much more support and a lot less hassel..

[tiagosilva29]

Debian

[Growled Member]

Debian for stability or Arch for cutting edge. I personally prefer Debian.

[Kreuger]

I prefer Debian because debs are a breeze to work with. Im pretty sure Arch is a lot of compiling too.

[Max Norris]

Arch is rather good, but can be fairly hands on at times, never mind having the occasional problems (some serious, especially if you don't read up on things before doing updates), comes with being a bleeding edge distro. On the plus side you get exactly what you want (build up versus tearing down a kitchen sink distro), has an optional ports/portgage like system available, excellent documentation, fast updates, etc. Optionally, if you like how Arch works and are a KDE fan, Chakra might be worth a look. No longer based on Arch, but still similar in design, uses a "half rolling" release model which I rather like (system is stable, userland is bleeding edge), and it's very KDE-centric.. in fact GTK based software is treated like a second rate citizen and is frowned upon. Great if you're into KDE but it's not for everybody.

But if you want it to work with the minimal amount of fuss, I'd go with Debian or one of its derivatives myself, especially if you stick to the stable branch.. although I don't recall having any major problems using Testing either back when I used it, nothing that crippled the system anyway. Install it and forget it, it's a good "workhorse" distro.

[Art_X]

guess i will go with debian then, would people suggest it for a core i7 desktop, and a server ?

[Max Norris]

guess i will go with debian then, would people suggest it for a core i7 desktop, and a server ?

Debian stable makes an excellent server distro (bleeding edge and servers are typically a bad idea), and sure, it'll run just fine on an i7 too.

[Karl L.]

Max Norris has a very good explanation of the primary differences between Arch and Debian. They are essentially on opposite ends of the spectrum. Debian updates slowly but is very easy, fast, and stable. Arch updates rapidly but is time intensive to configure and sometimes unstable.

To answer your other question, one of Debian's most common roles is as a workhorse server distro. It will work well on the latest hardware, including an Ivy Bridge Core i7. I personally use it on a Sandy Bridge Core i5 - my primary workstation - with no major problems to speak of.

[Art_X]

Already install it and xfce on laptop, not sure if i should go with the usual KDE as I do, going to have a play about and see what i like :)

[simonlang]

u shud give zenwalk a try. worked like a charm last time i ran it on my laptop.

[xxxxxx.xxxxxx]

It appears that im a little late, but I would have said if you are a Gentoo user install Arch it wont be much of a learning curve. I use Arch as my primary system and Debian on all my servers, as far as the two distros go they are the opposite ends of the scale but imo the two best available distros currently.

[ViperAFK]

Gentoo on my laptop is really annoying now, due to the fact that is takes hours to compile some of the updates, namely the new 4.10.3 KDE updates as well as libreoffice, plus it stresses the poor thing out.

On my other systems its not an issue as they have the power to configure the packages, I have googled the pros and cons between the two, and a lot of people say to use one over the other, I have tried arch and it seems good, but the advise seems to be titled towards debian.

Should I just go with debian or try arch again, sometimes too much choice is not always a good thing

if you like gentoo but only dislike having to compile things I'd recommend arch. Arch is similar to gentoo in that you have a ton of control over your system and build your system from the ground up, but unlike gentoo arch uses binary packages and updates are very quick.

Debian can be built up from a very minimal base too though so in the end it really goes down to if you prefer bleeding edge or very stable updates.

I prefer Debian because debs are a breeze to work with. Im pretty sure Arch is a lot of compiling too.

Arch has all binary packages, there is no compiling unless you use the AUR, and even if you use the AUR you usually only need to use it for a few packages here and there, arch's repos are pretty good and have most anything you'd need.

[n_K]

Debian!

Arch is great and all but if you get an update that breaks your laptop, it'll be a pain in the arse to fix, plus there's bugs and I've found arch to be of questionably **** quality as of late, heck I'm actually temped to give debian a go.

[greythorne]

Using Debian wheezy on a HP laptop. The thing is you can fry an egg on it. Its that hot. The laptop has dual graphics. Intel 4000 HD and ati radeon 5400m. Any idea what I should do? Wireless not working no matter what I try. I followed the Debian wiki but no use.

[Haggis Veteran]

what wireless do you have?

[Growled Member]

Debian!

Arch is great and all but if you get an update that breaks your laptop, it'll be a pain in the arse to fix, plus there's bugs and I've found arch to be of questionably **** quality as of late, heck I'm actually temped to give debian a go.

 

That's true but on the other hand Debian stable is so far behind it doesn't support newer hardware. Hardware a year or so old, it's solid.

[+Majesticmerc MVC]

If you're already a Gentoo user, you'd probably be more at home with Arch than with Debian, but both are good distros. Arch is more hands on like Gentoo, but with no (or little) compiling of packages. Debian is kind of the tortoise, in that it's a consistently stable distro, but slow to update, whereas Arch is constantly updating, but occasionally a pain to configure when core packages update.

 

Incidentally, you might want to give Fedora a try. You get a pretty stable distro, but frequent updates. The downside of Fedora is that I've heard it's a PITA to install nowadays.

[greythorne]

what wireless do you have?

It's a broadcom 4313. Also how about the dual graphics?

[Haggis Veteran]

Incidentally, you might want to give Fedora a try. You get a pretty stable distro, but frequent updates. The downside of Fedora is that I've heard it's a PITA to install nowadays.

 

I used fedora before Debian, its easy enough to install if you follow the instructions

 

Its good as Majesticmerc says its stable with frequent updates but be prepared for some issues now and again

[ViperAFK]

After running wheezy for a while on my laptop, I did go back to xubuntu (and then back to arch which I'm running now). I liked debian, but arch's newer packages just work a lot better on my hardware. I like just like arch's design better. Using systemd by default, its packages are very really patched and generally stick as close to upstream as possible etc...

 

They are both good distros, really down to user preference. Use debian if you are very concerned about "stability" and/or really like the debian base and tools, and debian's easier install. Use arch if you want more bleeding edge packages, true rolling release, and very upstream packages.

 

 

 

Debian!
Arch is great and all but if you get an update that breaks your laptop, it'll be a pain in the arse to fix, plus there's bugs and I've found arch to be of questionably **** quality as of late, heck I'm actually temped to give debian a go.

 

 

Ironically enough, I've actually found arch to be less buggy on my laptop than debian, mostly due to certain very outdated packages in debian. I've rarely had major issues with arch myself.

 

Judging from the threads I've seen from you a more conservative distro should be a much better fit for you. Arch is a bleeding edge rolling release that always has the latest upstream software. This also means the latest upstream bugs. However, since arch gets updated so often, it also gets bugfixes for these issues very fast, and in comparison a very conservative distro like debian, you will sometimes be pretty much "stuck" with whatever bugs you run into, unless they decide to backport the fixes.