I used Linux 20-10 years a go, and got away from it. I came back and have been using Linux Mint 17.3 Cinnamon for the past couple months.

I don't know why, but I just love Cinnamon. I wish I didn't like it, but I do. Other then the "Desktop" settings aren’t in "Desktop," and some "Display" settings aren’t in "Display," I really like the set up.

I'm using it for typical desktop use. I was thinking, Why do I need to use Debian-Ubuntu-Mint-Cinnamon, when I can use Debian-Cinnamon?

Some might say, use the Linux Mint 2 (Debian-Mint-Cinnamon). The same question could be asked, why use Debian-Mint-Cinnamon, when you can just use Debian-Cinnamon?

The one thing I don't like is, you have a really nice OS in Mint 17.3. OK, I have an idea. Lets take all the good stuff we created for it, update it until it works good, don't enjoy it, but lets scrap most stuff and go with totally different software in version 18.

I read Debian doesn't change as often as other Distros.

For a typical desktop user, it seems like I would hardly know a Debian-Cinnamon system, from a Debian-Ubuntu-Mint-Cinnamon system. Is that true?

Why would you want a Debian-Ubuntu-Mint-Cinnamon, when you can have a Debian-Cinnamon?

Thank you,
Chris.

P.S. Good thing I'm not a drug dealer. A Debian-Ubunt-Mint-Cinnamon deal would drive me crazy!!

It was a little hard to comprehend if this was indeed a question. However, if you want to have Debian with Cinnamon as a desktop environment you can download it from, err, Debian. Right here:
http://cdimage.debian.org/debian-cd/...d64/bt-hybrid/ [amd64]
http://cdimage.debian.org/debian-cd/...386/bt-hybrid/ [i386]

Best regards,
HMW

That's the great thing about using Linux...choices. I'm currently running Debian Testing and switch my desktop between Gnome and i3 depending upon my mood. Yes, it's true that Debian stable doesn't change as often as a distro like Mint, and is very stable as a result, but that comes at a cost of sometimes using older packages. That isn't necessarily a bad thing, of course.

I use Testing because the packages are newer, but that can come at a cost of risking instability. It's not happened to me yet, but it could. Distros like Mint use newer packages by default which is one reason people prefer that type of distro.

Use what works for you.

I installed Debian Jessie in VirtualBox recently, and it gave me a choice of multiple desktops on install. You could pick one or multiple ones, including KDE, MATE, Cinnamon, XFCE, Gnome 3, and LXDE, if my memory serves (I have screenshots, but I'm not near the machine where the screenshots are stored).

I did test installing multiple desktops and was able to install two (KDE and MATE, just for grins and giggles) successfully.

There will be differences between Debian running the Cinnamon desktop environment and LM running the same DE.

LM is based on Ubuntu which makes some rather strange and significant changes to the Debian system on which Ubuntu is based. LM then makes their own changes, not much, to the Ubuntu system.

Cinnamon is a fork of Gnome Shell that is an in house project of Linux Mint.

The default user configuration, packages included in the default installation and so forth will be different. Debian doesn't bother with a lot of eye candy configuration figuring the user knows best what they like to look at.

If you install the Debian with Cinnamon DE I would suggest, not knowing your hardware, that you may want the unofficial Live CD with firmware. Debian does not include firmware that doesn't fit the Debian definition of "free software" in its "main" repo. All official install media only install packages from the main repo.

Ubuntu and LM include that type of firmware (and other non-free packages). This is not a problem really, see;
http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...e-list-330913/

go to the last pages - that is an old thread so the first pages are out of date.

Using the;
http://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/un.../current-live/

Will avoid those problems.

Much of the hardware out there today will not really need that non-free stuff. My box doesn't. My last one did however and was not able to show a gui desktop with out that firmware for the video controller.

You can get the Cinnamon DE on most Gnu/Linux distros. There are a lot of reasons why there are so many distros. Package management, different security priorities (Ubuntu puts convenience ahead of security to a great extent, LM does a bit better) and default language are a number of reasons people and groups have put out different distros. When you get further from the "core" distros (Red Hat, Slackware, Debian and some of the older offshoots of those like openSuse and the Mandrake/Mandriva/Mageia fork and Ubuntu even later) you find a lot of them are primarily interested in artwork, a specific interest group - some very specialized;
http://hannahmontana.sourceforge.net/Site/Home.html

Some even put out extremely configured versions of desktops to show off what can be done with them like;
http://www.pclinuxos.com/get-pclinux...monty-desktop/

Which is worth a peek to anyone but be sure to read system requirements first. This is a very large install, definitely not "light" on resources. But is also an exceptional piece of work that shows off, very well, the things you can do with the KDE desktop environment.

Disclaimer - I am not a fan of KDE - Full Monty did give me a clue as to why people put up with it though - I really do admire the work and dedication that goes into this offering. Wonderful experience just to see it. Running on a Live DVD doesn't do it justice at all - it really needs installed to fully admire it. I do it briefly every couple of years just to see if they have done something new to it.

While Cinnamon is available on about anything you want it on, the best argument to stick with LM is that the guy responcible for Cinnamon is also the head of LM. That being the case it is probably pretty well integrated the way he likes it to be presented. This is a fairly feeble reason but it could be an important reason for some users.

Cinnamon is the default DE for LM for very obvious reasons. They also put out another OS called Linux Mint Debian Edition based on Debian Stable (currently Jessie [Debian 9]) with the Mate desktop environment as default.

Mate is a fork of Gnome 2 which preceeded Gnome 3 which is the backend of Gnome Shell, Cinnamon and Unity DEs. It is a panel centric DE. As someone that started out using Gnome 2 I like it. My wife uses Mate.

I prefer Xfce which is also panel centric. I like it because, in my opinion, its panel is what the Gnome 2 panel system wanted to grow up to be.

Are any of these DEs better than the others? Yes. All of them are. Just depends on what the user likes best.

You say you like Cinnamon. Great. Use it.

I don't like it but can use it. I abhore Gnome Shell. Unity is not near as good as Gnome Shell. I have always hated KDE and still do but prefer it to the entire Gnome 3 family.

This makes no difference at all. This is just one of the choices people have with Gnu/Linux. There are very many more options for use besides those. They all exist because people are not all the same and work in different ways.

I think Xfce is the best. Try it. You will probably then think I am nuts. Great. Don't use it.

As for Debian Stable it is not all that different from other distros. It is one of the surviving early distros. Works on a flexible time table of development that frustrates some people. Target of about 2 years for a new stable release. Releases only come when they actually meet the Debian definition for "stable". Ubuntu LTS is based on Debian testing which Debian defines as unstable. Debian has another, sort of rolling version called Sid which feeds packages to Debian testing, it is less stable than testing. Ubuntu non LTS versions are all based on Sid.

Ubuntu considers all their releases to be "stable".

Debian supports the stable releases for a year after the release of the following stable release. So you have a lifespan of Official Debian support for a bit over 3 years. It is a great choice for users. You can wait to upgrade to the next version for a while to make sure the next version is really stable in your definition.

Keep in mind that new versions of software are going to have the most bugs. Do you really need the newest version of software? If you do Debian Sid probably is running it. If not, true for most people, Debian Stable is the way to go.

You will also find, to be fair, that CentOS also has this sort of reputation for being a "boring" (little chance of exciting breakage) like Debian Stable.

I like Debian. I like the APT system better than RPM. I also recommend Mageia for new user which is RPM based package management. There is a lot of choice. Most of the choices are good. The definition of good is up to the user.

My Dreaded Mother in Law runs Debian Stable with Xfce configured to look a lot like Vista now with no problem. Could have installed KDE and made it look even more like Vista. She is only 80 so I figured she could handle some differences. Seems to like it.

There is something out there in Gnu/Linux land that is really good for just about any PC user. They just need to find it.

This is a great thing but most people want limited choices so that they don't have to think about it much. In light of that I think Debian does a very good job of picking the DEs and packages encluded in their default installs maintaining a good balance between choice and certainty of what you are getting.

I am running primarily on Debian testing lately, this will probably switch back to Sid soon. Don't ask me why, not sure. Just like both of them. Stable is the way to start out.

One warning;
Do not ever mix packages from Ubuntu based distros with Debian or use Debian packages on them. You may get away with it on some. You will eventually screw your system. Ubuntu makes some seemingly, to me, pointless changes in the useage of the filesystem. This means that the install script for an Ubuntu package installed on Debian will put files where Debian will not find them. The reverse is also true. They are not compatible systems.

4 members found this post helpful.

I use Fluxbox with elements of Xfce4 and KDE. I also use Debian Unstable, which is usually stable if you don't blindly dist-upgrade.

I prefer pure Debian over Mint, and Mint over Ubuntu. I'm not a fan of the whole sudo thing, and I like how Debian, at least Unstable, is never a fixed release. Ubuntu does have the advantage of Launchpad, which usually contains packages Debian doesn't have in it's repositories. I use a few PPAs on Debian with no issue though.

I like Mint. As far as I am concerned, it's Ubuntu done right. It's not my favorite distro, but it's in the top ten, mostly because of the codecs issue. As replica9000, points out, it does have Ubuntu's quirks and I probably would not still be using Mint had it not gone to an LTS model.

Fluxbox is also my preferred environment; one of the killer features for me is tabbed windows. I also use Enlightenment from time to time. Depending on the circumstances and my whim, I from time to time use Englightenment, I really have little use for the whiz-bang desktop environments with a bunch of bells and whistles which annoy more than they enlighten.

Just my two cents.

Thank you very, very much for the replies.
I tried the live Debian amd64 Cinnamon live DVD. I saw a lot of errors booting up. It came on the other monitor (TV across the room) with a blank screen at the computer. Couldn't really try it out not being able to see (mouse and keys can't go across the room).

About 10 or 15 years a go, it seemed easier to pick a distro/DE you like. Now it's, an update, but some didn't like it so it forked. One fork goes one way and changes. The other goes backwards. The other fork goes in the opposite form the other fork. I can't figure out whats going on. Where did Linux go? Nobody knows.

I used to love KDE. I have a older friend who personally knew the man who invented LSD (the drug, not a distro). His personality is just like Plasma. Its a mess.

I love apt. I tried RH9 when it first came out. After using it for a while, it was a nightmare. I think I have scars from RPM.

One complaint from the Linux community was that Mint is not as secure as others (Ubuntu). LM holds back security fixes.

I used cairodock for a while, but I hate the upper bar. I had two places up and down to open programs. I uninstalled it. Now I have to get used to the bottom again.

Just the little bit I got to use in the Debian Live, it seemed very stable. It was like a rock.

I used LM when it first came out. I got away from Linux and came back. Now its' the number #1 distro. I liked that it came out of the box with media stuff. I could tell I'd have to do more tweaking then other distros with Debian.

I'd like to get the live CD to run on the right monitor. I thought about unplugging the monitor 2, to test.

Chris.

Update OMG!!! I tried Mint 17.3 Xfce. Now your talking!! This is the linux I was looking for. Xfce is really, really nice!! I love it!!! Everything is in the right place, look and feel, looks and feels good.
Wonder why Xfce isn't more popular? It seems closer to the linux I left years a go. like the old linux.

Only a few little problems, but it seems real stable. It makes Cinnamon seem to much like Windows. Wish I would of been steered towards Xfce at first.

Just wanted to post this in case someone reads about Mint. The Mint I like the best is Xfce.

Chris.

oh, i think xfce is sufficiently popular.

LM doesn't really support XFCE, not like they do Cinnamon and to a lesser extent MATE.
I was going to go with the LMDE Cinnamon for a change (LMDE 2 i suppose), but i figure that all the crap they do I can do also, like installing proprietary graphics drivers or other 'advanced' stuff.
If you want ease of use, out of the box click and go stuff, then LM is cool, but basically it isn't that hard to figure out for yourself, if you want to learn more.
LM is ubuntu made easier, LMDE is debian made easier. The debian version is faster, for some reason, than the ubuntu version, which LM states on their site somewhere, on the LMDE page i think. I'm not sure why ubuntu is slower, but from personal experience it is, including LM ubuntu.
There are many distros that may be better than Debian, but for now I am going with debian because I have the most experience with it and it is probably the most popular, considering Ubuntu is based on debian, but somehow inferior to debian, go figure. I have several partitions ready for other distros to test out, see which others i like. I too dislike KDE (kiddie) and gnome (what happened there? ubuntu corrupted it?)
so, download install media for debian sid xfce (though i'm having trouble locating it, lol)
cya

Simply why don't you install your system yourself??

You do not need those ubuntu guys, .... it is already difficult enough sometimes.


You should install debian as server with apt-get or debootstrap, compile your own kernel, and make the grub config. Install video card and put cinnamon !!
you'll have then something that really work cleanly.

I had two threads mixed up. With a bunch of tabs open, I had answers to this, posted in the wrong thread. Thought I was talking to you guys!! Good thing I didn't ask you how to fix my car.

I installed Debian, it was a mess both times.

I can do almost anything in Mint. Almost none of the "based on debian" commands worked in Debian. It was my mistake, read to may places where it sounded like it was the same. Something must of been wrong, because I could not find hardly anything on the internet. Couldn't learn how to get anything I needed done.

I don't view it now as good as Debian-ubuntu-Mint. I think LM is #1 because it's so good. It would be nice if I could of learned more about how to manage my way around debian.

Since Debian is a "little Harder" then Mint, I think they should make a Debian Version that is a little easier. Keep it like it is, but have at least one that's as easy as Mint. I think it would pass Mint and be the #1 distro. JMHO.

If they had a version that was as easy as Mint, for years it would of been ranked #1. It would be the most famous Linux out. Distrowatch would rank them like this;

1 Debian 2985>
2 Mint 2019<
3 Ubuntu 1820<
4 openSUSE 1272

Chris.

There's LMDE (Linux Mint Debian Edition). I think it uses Debian's testing branch, so it should be more stable and faster than the Ubuntu based Linux Mint.

Almost any command in Linux Mint should be the same in Debian, unless it's specific to Mint. Usually the most notable difference is in Debian, one would use su to gain root privileges, rather than using sudo before every single root command.

After 10 years of running Ubuntu and Mint, I gave Debian/Cinnamon a try. It was a bit tedious getting all my normal applications installed, as they weren't all in the Debian repositories, and Debian doesn't really support PPAs, but I learned a lot in the process and now I'm delighted with the result. It's much quicker than Ubuntu/Mint and I especially like the fact that I get to run Evolution 3.26 rather than 3.18, which is a dramatic improvement. So far I've had no stability issues. It just works.