I'm a long time Debian user, I switched to Ubuntu during the long wait for Etch just so I could see what all the hype was about. It's a very tidy distribution, however I prefer Debian's flexibility.

SO. With elation I recieved Etch in the mail yesterday, and while installing it made the following observations:

1) The graphical installer makes nothing easier, only slightly more aesthetic (in fact there are MORE questions to answer than for Sarge)

2) The number of packages installed by default is beyond a joke

3) I have no sound

4) I have no WiFi

5) It takes 45 minutes (not really) to get my cursor from one side of the screen to the other using the touchpad

6) My screen resolution is set wrong and I have black bars

Also:

7) Renaming the Mozilla suite makes the Debian developers go from looking like a group of professionals to a group of squabbling babies. WHY could they not have been the 'bigger man' in this debacle, made Epiphany the default browser, and left Firefox out altogether? It's not like people can't download it themselves. Pathetic.

8) What the hell is the point in a distribution consisting of 3 DVDs? I thought 2 was bad enough. I have 3 DVDs full of software, most of which will be outdated in a few months given the pace of development in the OSS community, and the rest of which I will never use. Not only that, but for all this vast amount of software, LESS works out of the box than Ubuntu, which (as a distribution) is 1/22nd the size of Debian Etch. Is it not enough to have even just a single DVD with all the core packages, and allow people to download the rest from repositories where it is always going to be current (yes I am aware of the NetInstall option, that's beside the point)? Is it too much to assume that people have an internet connection these days - that, by the way, is not a rhetorical question. When answering the package management questions during install I was asked to choose an internet connection, one of which was a Firewire port (who the hell connects to the net via FW?? Just because it's possible doesn't mean you should list it as an option) and the other my actual Ethernet card, neither of which were connected to the internet. I wasn't given an option to specify that I didn't have an internet connection (yet) and I found it unreasonably onerous to continue without specifying a valid one - if the assumption is that people invariably have internet connections in the year 2007, why include so much software in the distribution?

I know I will have everything running smoothly soon and I hate to be so critical of my (still) favourite distribution, but god what an anti-climax. There has been a huge amount of good work done but I'm sure people were expecting more from these guys after such a long wait. Ubuntu raised the bar for desktop Linux and Debian has failed to clear it.

What do you guys think??

It's what might happen.

For the rest, well, everything works perfectly for me.
Considering the fact that they forbid themselves about shipping non proprietary stuffs, some things will not work out of the box. But it didn't take me long to fix these things. Blame the hardware makers. The more pressure we put on them, the more they will give working open-source drivers.

I stick with debian because of their philosophy and then because of the number of packages and stability.

After using Unix/Linux for about 15 years and having tried slackware, mandrake, redhat, ubuntu, suse; solaris; hp-ux, osf1,.. I prefer by far debian

My opinion of Etch is that it's still the best, for what I want and need.

What's the point of a distribution with 3DVDs? The point is that for someone who just wants to have EVERYTHING available and who doesn't have an internet connection or a slow internet connection, it's going to take up a lot of space. I would have thought that was obvious. Also, having everything on DVD insures that you can still install and use Etch on an older system for decades after Etch has expired and left the archives on the Internet. The point is that Debian is the UNIVERSAL operating system--it gives you choices.

As for removing Firefox, consider that Debian supports more than just i386. Debian provides software for many hardware platforms, including security updates. Mozilla does not. So, what's preferable--removing Firefox and leaving users of other hardware platforms in the cold, or take advantage of the Open Source nature of Firefox's code and provide a renamed Firefox to all hardware platforms? Debian took the option which best served its users, while still remaining consistent with its Social Contract.

Now, you say that Debian should have gotten rid of its Social Contract, just for Firefox. But really, does this make sense? Debian is a volunteer effort, and volunteer efforts work because they MEAN something. Debian exists because Debian developers believe in what Debian stands for--and that means its Social Contract and commitment to Free Software.

I have to say that I agree with you on the installer. Aesthetically more pleasing but functionally really doesn't do anything different the text installer does. Acutally the graphical installer is slightly slower.

I don't have a problem with the number of packages by default rather the choice of default packages. Being a KDE user, having to monkey with Gnome to get the system set and then install KDE and then remove Gnome is a hastle I could have done without. My sound worked on the big box without settings but on my old living room Dell with an isa CS built in. I'm going to ahve to monkey to get that working. But that was always the case with any distro.

Don't have wifi so can't say anything to that.

But My Radeon 9100 setup perfectly and is running smooth as in Sarge.

Personally I think the hubub over Firefox was stupid. But I had it downloaded anyhow and just installed it manually. That and T-bird.

And I find (using the cd's) of the 21 cd's I only need 1-14. Haven't had to use 15-21 for any of the packages I've installed. But it's all a matter of choice. If I don't use them I'll just take them out of my folders and remove them from teh sources file and just save them for reference later. but like it was said, it's all a matter of choice.

My main gripe was that acpi is enabled by default and causes powerdown problems for people running older hardware (like me) who use apm instead (since both can't be enabled at the same time) I had to do the acpi=off option and had to choose the right kernel image to load.

But getting past that the system is a dream. Best running system I've had since Mandrake 10.0 (which temporarily took me away from Debian). This is the system I'll be keeping on my machine for quite some time. (I'll just keep security updates going.) From 1 to 10 I give it an 8.5 (Mandrake 10.0 was an 8 and sarge was a 7.5 those are the best I've used yet)

Though I do miss Chromium not being included this time. (miss some mindless shooting from time to time).

I agree with this, I really don't understand the reasons for this.

For acpi, there is an option to pass to the installer (can't remember but I'm sure google would tell). A graphical option would have been better.

The OP (and some of the responses) show an unfortunate lack of understanding about Debian theory. There is a sticky on the Debian forum here named something like "Debian Post-Install" that is at least a couple years old, so it's not as if the correct method of installation has been hidden in a corner. My own more recent Installation Howto is here.

There is absolutely no reason to install Debian using all the defaults, then switching the desktop to KDE and going thru it's configuration separately. A mindless installation accepting the defaults is a concession to the Ubuntu policy of, "Make it easy for the recent Windows refugee, who wouldn't recognize an efficiently configured system anyway."

A second misunderstanding is the concept of "Waiting for Etch." Most knowledgeable Debian users had switched to Etch long before it's official release. The Stable Debian OS is intended for critical servers and production workstations. It is not generally satisfactory for a home desktop/hobbyist system. The OP's willingness to switch to Ubuntu while waiting shows that the kind of stability inherent in a Debian Stable release was not an issue.

Finally, the idea that hardware requiring proprietary drivers should work out-of-the-box is an absolutely anti-Debian position. Debian provides a free (libre) OS. Any non-libre software must be added by the end-user, and there is nothing wrong with doing that. In fact, Debian official policy encourages it. That is one of the primary reasons there are 100+ Debian derivatives. If the inclusion of such software is important to you, you should be using some other distro, not criticizing Debian for long standing policies.

Debian is not a distribution aimed at people who want it to "just work," and to come with peloaded eye candy to "impress my friends." I was particulrly pleased by this recent analysis of the Etch release. A quote: Debian is a teaching tool, as well as the best and most stable Linux OS that can be had without building everything yourself from source code. If the role of student is not something you appreciate, you can "use" Debian, but you'll never "love" it.

PS: If you use Gnome, Epiphany is a great browser, and on the verge of becoming real competition on a technical level for the Mozilla family of semi-free internet tools.

I've installed Etch on three machines with no issues. Everything works perfectly for me.
Etch is a first rate distro in my opinion:-)

1) that is why the text based is still there if you prefer it

2) default being the key - it is a fully loaded newb desktop - dont like it, dont install it

3) uh ok, I do.

4) uh ok, I do.

5) takes me a finger-flick worth of time

6) uh ok. I dont.

7) I always learn about the REAL issue before I make myself look dumb....

8) Was you forced to order them? You do know Debian comes in sizes from the large you mention to a floppy. If I picked one and then complained about it - well see #7

nice username - could come in handy

Um, yeah, it's right there in my post.

Why not use the KDE ISO then?

Which one is that? I tried booting from a couple of the other cd's and didn't get a responce.

There are three alternate CD#1's; which install by default your choice of Gnome, KDE, or Xfce. But even without having one of those, there is no reason to install Gnome if you prefer an alternative.

FWIW, I got my response to the OP in place now (Post #6)

the one with KDE in the name of the ISO or if you rather have XFCE then the one with XFCE in the name of the ISO

you can afaik also start the install with any ISO and specify the KDE task also

Ooops had not seen this CD. Sorry!!!
(Not installing a GUI is fine for me but for noobies it's not an option..)

It would have surprised me from debian to force people

So currently, this thread doesn't bring anything constructive until now.

I just installed the "standard system" from the net installer. I did not install the desktop environment.

Once it was done installing I threw this into the console: aptitude install xserver-xorg-core xserver-xorg xorg kdm kdebase flashplugin-nonfree libflash-mozplugin kaffeine w32codecs mozilla-mplayer build-essential openssh-server konversation kopete digikam gimp ksnapshot amarok k3b xmms amule ktorrent mozilla-thunderbird kaudiocreator kmix openoffice.org gkrellm adept synaptic knmap ettercap-gtk vorbis-tools ark rar unrar p7zip-full zip apcupsd libxp6 ntpdate kpackage konq-plugins gstreamer0.10-fluendo-mp3 sudo net-tools soundconverter gstreamer0.10-pitfdll gstreamer0.10-ffmpeg gstreamer0.10-plugins-bad gstreamer0.10-plugins-ugly libxine1 vlc kdenetwork-kfile-plugins smartmontools gtk-qt-engine gtk2-engines gtk2-engines-gtk-qt gtk-engines-qtpixmap gtk2-engines-qtpixmap

And BOOM instant minimum install. Boots about a million times faster then Kubuntu.