Why Prefer Debian GNU/Linux Over Other Distros?

My introduction to computers was way back in 1993, when I used an old 80286 while studying for a four month long introductory course to computer usage. 'latest' hardware in town in those days was a server with with something like an ISA (or was it EISA?) bus. It cost more than Rupees 100,000.00 (one rupee = 48 US $, at 2003 exchange rates). One of my first experiences was, when asked to write a simple procedure to enter some fictional data on something called dBase, I went on to add some code which would play the seven musical notes every time a record was updated. The 'lab supervisor' at the Institute responded by promptly 'promoting' me to an 8088 based IBM PC/AT. My first 'task' on this machine was to write a macro on a spreadsheet, which would fill all its 1024 cells with numbers 1 to 1024. Writing the macro was just like saying 1-2-3. But, executing the macro took a full 10 minutes, shutting out all input, including the 'ctrl + alt + del' sequence.

At the institute, two two students had to share a single machine. The available machines were a bit old, and there used to a scramble for the better ones. I noticed that one particular machine was kept 'off bounds' for us. One day I decided to take this particular machine. I pushed the power switch but there was no response. I was told that there was some kind of 'access restriction' on that machine, and it was running something called 'Unix'. I became curious, and started to pester the trainers. The conversation went on something like this:-

Q. Why was this Unix thing not installed on other machines?
A. Coz Unix requires so much memory and hard disk space.
What are the courses you offer on the Unix machine?
A. Unix and C programming, of course.
Q. Why not teach WordStar and Lotus 123 not run on this Unix thing?(That is what we were being taught there)
A. Coz. there are compatibility issues.
Q. What do you mean by compatibility issues?
A. Why are you so curious? Anyway, now that you ask, it is that WordStar, Lotus 123 and dBase are written for the operating system called 'DOS', and will not run on Unix.
Q. Why can't these programmers create 'compatible' programmes?
A. Will you please shut up??

I did not get any occasion to touch a computer for next few months except at some friends' or at the University. Meanwhile, my curiosity on the subject was aroused, and I was keenly following the trade journals. I still recall reading the initial announcements of one of the early versions of a program, called 'Java' from a company called Sun. The news item went on to say that Java will wipe out compatibility issues. All the users were required to do was to install something called a 'virtual machine' on their machines. All programs created in Java would run on any machine with the 'virtual machine' installed, irrespective of the operating system. Few months later, I read about introduction of a rival 'Java run time environment' by another company, to whom Sun Microsystems had licensed the Java standards. A further few months down the line, it became clear that this rival company's - no prizes for guessing the name - Java Virtual Machine was not compatible with the original one from Sun Microsystems. I just kept these incidents in my mind.

During the rare occasions when I used computers, my tasks were confined to simple word processing. That is, when the system was not crashing. So, when I started scouting around for my my own hardware I had all the above issues - (i) compatibility (ii) stability, and the (iii)unethical behavior of attempting to destroy a standard which would have enabled un hindered exchange of data across platforms, in mind. I was determined to find an operating system which took up less resources while at the same time compatible with data from other operating systems.

I started with a clone of 'Red Hat Linux'. (I was yet to hear of the 'GNU' part of it). It was fairly usable. But 'fairly' did not serve my purpose. So, I moved on to Mandrake Linux. It was fair and beautiful. but not usable. Mandrake Linux crashed more often than MiGs of the Indian Air Force. To be fair, that was less often than the frequency with which I used to get the Blue screen). I was at a total loss to understand why these two popular and leading distros were not working for me.

On the brighter side, experiences with Red Hat and Mandrake where really, really, exhilarating. I learned a lot using these distros. I discovered the power of configurability afforded by GNU/Linux - though both RH and Mandrake preferred to call the distro 'Linux'. I discovered that I can actually recompile the kernel, which is a key component of the operating system. I discovered a whole new world of control. User friendliness received a fresh new meaning. I realized that if, and only if, the software obeyed the user can one call it user - friendly. Mere glitz and shine was not the same thing as usability utility, and control. User interfaces 'dumbed down' usability. I also found that software will not work for me due to at leastthree reasons:-

1. User does not know how to use it
2. It is not properly configured
3. Software is buggy

I also found that at least in my case, I was not able to figure out which of the three reasons was at the root of my inability to use my box. Later experience with people freshly entering the world of digital computers told me that others too had this problem. The operating system touted as the "most stable OS in the world" crashed frequently on my machine, and I simply had no knowledge or expertise to figure out why.

I realised that the problem was not with the GNU/Linux operating system; people who knew the software, those millions of people administering and controlling servers and networks were vouching for GNU/Linux. By the time, I had realized that unlike other operating systems, anybody can create a distribution of the GNU/Linux Operating system, and a hunch, which later on proved correct, told me that my problems can be traced back to bad packaging policy. Thus began the search of a better distro.

I was looking for a distribution which would ensure that the packages were stable enough. I wanted an assurance that my system would fail to obey my wishes, only because of either a misconfiguration, or as a result of my ignorance. That way, I could ensure that by following the guides and documentation in /usr/share/doc (the usual location of help pages in a GNU/Linux system) I can get my system to work. I knew fairly too well that I could not distinguish a failure due to a bug, and a failure due to mis configuration. I did not want buggy software.

Around this time I met the guys at the Kochi Free Software Users' Group. They introduced me to Debian GNU/Linux. i first balked at the prospect of a 7 CD installation. I cringed when I heard that its installation process was very tedious. In fact, I was, at one stage of installation, close to tears. Today, I am smiling - indeed - laughing (of course, secretly) when I find people using not merely other OSes, but also other distributions.

What do I find so attractive about Debian GNU/Linux?

Most attractive thing about Debian is its packaging policy. Unlike other distros, which have only one version at a time, Debian has three versions -- stable, testing, and unstable. Details are here. Currently, these three versions are named Woody, Sarge, and Sid. To find out what is behind these names, Click here.

"Debian" is not a corporation or a profit making body. It is an informal collective of people. More than one thousand people listed here volunteer their time regularly for Debian. Several thousands others put in occassional, but substantial contributions towards Debian. The large number of volunteers involved in the Debian project has several beneficial effects. Unlike most of the large software corporations, where key decisions are made by few individuals, that is, if at all people other tha the founder are involved in the decision making proces, Debian does not depend on one or two individuals. It is a fact of life that most corporations depend on the life and health of the handful people who control them. To put your software at the mercy of these handful peoples' lives is a risk all users, and in particular businesses and governments, should avoid.

Another attraction of Debian is its packaging policy. Debian has a unique set of guidelines to be followed while selecting software to be included. This policy is much wider and stricter than Free Software Foundation's four freedoms and definition of Free Software. For Debian, the freedoms in 'Free Software' should be a bit wider, and that free software should use free software for creation and use. Thus, if you require a non free compiler for compiling your program, Debian does not consider it to be free. I feel that this is a very sensible idea. This does not mean that Debian does not include non-free software in it. You will find software which is otherwise free but depends on non-free software for compilation in 'contrib' section.

Debian also has an excellent classification for software. You should remember that depending on the version of Debian you choose (ie., stable, testing and unstable), you can choose between an astounding more than 6,000 in Woody to an even more mind boggling 8,000 in unstable Sid. All these cannot be installed at the same time, because several packages, like MTA (Mail Transfer Agents), web servers, etc, conflict with each other. You can browse the packages available using a utility called "Aptitude". In aptitude, you can view the packages by purpose for which they are used, urgency on an installation, and also by license terms, so that you know before hand as what exactly is in store for you after you install the programs.

The "killer app", however, in Debian, is set of programmes called "apt-get". Using these tools, upgrading your software and maintaining the existing software is a real cake walk, especially if you have access to the net. For example, if you want to install the package, say, GIMP, (the GNU Image ManiPulator), an advanced and highly versatile picture editor), simply issue the command "apt-get install gimp1.2".

One important point to note while speaking of the 7 CD installation set for the stable (Woody) version of Debian GNU/Linux is that you do not need the full set for a complete installation. The most popular, and important, packages are in the first CD. The packages are arranged in the CD in the order of popularity. So, even if you have the first CD alone, you still will have a working system up and running in less than 30 minutes on a reasonably fast system, clocking more than 1Giga Hertz.

Sure, 30 minutes is a lot more than what other distros, like Mandrake or Red Hat will take to install. But, in my humble opinion, the bother is worth a stable, usable, and powerful operating system, where the power is in your hands. So, what are you waiting for??