Debian Reviews

My main use case for Debian includes numerous applications, ranging from running web applications on AWS EC2 instances using Debian 12, and Debian 12 being the bedrock of Linux Mint, which I run on a personal Mac that is really old. Because of using Linux Mint, it has brought the laptop back to life and it is quick enough to use in a modern way even though the laptop is over a decade old.

I use Debian 12 for building a web application which runs on EC2 instances, and since Debian 12 is free on AWS, I believe it was made to be optimized for EC2 usage. Debian is one of the biggest and oldest Linux distributions, so it is one that came to mind when I was deciding which machine image to run.

Debian is deployed in my organization through the public cloud. I use Debian through the AWS Marketplace, but it is actually used on EC2 instances in AWS, which you would purchase through the EC2 page of the AWS console.

In my opinion, the best features Debian offers include its stability. The stable branch really is stable because once it is configured, I understand you can run it for a very long period of time without needing to reboot or update any of the components. That is really good when you want an application to be extremely stable and not go down, and you are happy using slightly older components. I also value the fact that Debian is open source, so it is free. That is very useful, and it has a big development community that builds it. I understand there are tens of thousands of software libraries which work with Debian from the apt package manager, APT, and also it is very lightweight, which I find to be good as well because that helps with cost savings.

Debian's lightweight design benefits my organization because it does not come with bloatware, minimizing RAM usage. Because of that, we can choose cheaper EC2 instances. You do not have to have as powerful RAM, which makes things cheaper, and also because it does not come with all this bloatware, it also makes it faster. So it is very efficient.

Debian positively impacts my organization by allowing us to utilize a much more lightweight operating system with Amazon EC2 instances, which greatly reduces costs because we can use EC2 instances with lower RAM. Cost savings are good. Debian is very well known across the industry, so different engineers from different teams know how to use it. Using the APT package manager is a common skill for cloud professionals, which makes it good, especially if you are hiring individuals into the company, because at least you would expect they have some type of background using Debian.

I do not know exact measurements, but I would expect we could save at least 10% of costs with EC2 instances just because our memory and CPU requirements would be lower because Debian is lightweight. So it would save cost to some degree.

I do not really think there are any improvements that need to be made. Debian is a very well-known distribution contributed to by tens of thousands of individuals, developers, and engineers, which makes it well optimized. The stable kernel because it is going to be older and naturally stable does not always support brand new components such as CPUs or specialized GPUs out of the box, which can make it difficult to use there. However, that is not much of a problem because Debian has different branches, including the testing and unstable branches.

I have been using Debian for maybe five years.

Debian is highly scalable because we can run it on AWS EC2 instances, so we could have zero or we could have tens of thousands of instances running it if we wanted to.

My experience with customer support is that I use Debian on AWS, and Amazon's enterprise support is amazing. They get back to you extremely quickly and they are highly experienced. I have not needed help from the Debian community for assistance, but I would imagine that would be brilliant because the user community is massive for Debian.

I previously used Ubuntu. The reason for switching to Debian was that I found it a little more lightweight, and the stable branch is extremely stable, which is something I wanted for this particular web website project that I was working on.

It is very difficult to find an exact metric for return on investment because Debian is really a bedrock from which everything else is built upon. However, I would say that using Debian compared to other distributions which have more bloatware would be cheaper because we can run it on less powerful hardware. In terms of cost savings, we might see a cost of at least 10% reduction compared to distributions with more bloatware.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is that it is free to use because Debian is open source, so there is no cost at all.

I did evaluate other options before choosing Debian, but there is nothing more to add.

I did not realize before starting to use Debian that there are different branches, which allows you to choose how stable or how up to date you want it to be. The stable branch, which is what I use, has features that are heavily tested. The software is older, but it does not break often at all because you have to manually update different components if you want them to do so. However, if you did want to use state-of-the-art components, you could consider the unstable version, which I have not personally used, but if I ever did want to do active development for the newest features, then I would be able to do that.

Debian is deployed in my organization through the public cloud. Using the APT package manager is a common skill for cloud professionals, which makes it good, especially if you are hiring individuals into the company, because at least you would expect they have some type of background using Debian.

I rate Debian a 10 because it is extremely stable, lightweight, fast, and open source, so it is free. The only real downsides are that there might be a learning curve because installing it requires a bit more technical experience than Ubuntu, and the hardware compatibility does not always work out of the box with the newest hardware. However, those things are to be expected if you are trying to configure something which is world-class and also highly stable. So I do not really see them as drawbacks; they are more considerations to be aware of.

My advice to others looking into using Debian is that I recommend using the stable branch if they want to make sure their application would be extremely stable, as it is a good way to go. Because it is so lightweight, it is very efficient to run Debian. There is a slight learning curve to it, which might make it a little harder to use than Ubuntu, but if experienced engineers are deploying it, I do not think that is a reason not to use it. I would recommend going for it.

I have primarily used Debian for bare-metal systems and embedded devices, utilizing it as a stable base OS for development, testing, and production environments. Debian is particularly useful for package management, OTA updates using .deb packages, and system-level debugging.

Currently, I have been developing an IP PA system project where I was using Debian exclusively, and it helped me significantly because of its reliability, stability, and package management system. Using Debian, I was able to deploy a reliable application and a reliable OTA update system.

Debian has been a great distribution that I have used, and it helped me considerably when I deployed my project, providing a reliable system for deployment.

I have primarily used Debian on on-premises systems and private environments, especially for Linux-based development and deployment setups. I have not primarily used it on public cloud platforms like AWS, but it works reliably in private setups.

It is mostly custom in-house infrastructure where we run Debian on our own hardware and internal systems, not relying on a managed private cloud provider.

For my needs, we require a stable release and predictable updates with minimal regressions and support for OTA updates. Debian excels in all these requirements with its tested stable release and conservative updates, making deployment predictable and reliable, especially in embedded or production systems.

In my experience, the best features Debian offers are its stability, predictability, behaviors, and strong package management, which are crucial for a reliable system. Updates are well-tested, dependencies are handled cleanly, and the system remains reliable over a long period, which is very important for production and embedded Linux environments.

When comparing Debian with other Linux distributions, Debian stands out for its stability and conservative package updates. Updates rarely introduce unexpected changes, making our system more reliable over time. The package management handles dependencies very cleanly, making installs and upgrades predictable and easier to manage, reducing downtime and debugging efforts compared to faster-moving distributions.

One particularly useful feature is how Debian handles package information with tools like apt-cache and apt-policies, making it easy to understand package versions, dependencies, and where a package is coming from, which helps during debugging. Additionally, I find the Debian DPKG tool very useful, among other tools that aid in integration.

In my case, Debian provides stability and reliable versions, as I have noticed very few system breakages after updates. The reliable package updating process in Debian is very dependable, which helps me considerably in my organization for reliable application development.

Using Debian, we experience significantly fewer bugs after deployment, resulting in smoother deployments owing to Debian's stability.

Debian support is excellent. While it does not have traditional paid customer support like some commercial distributions, the Debian community and documentation are very strong. I find that relying on community support and documentation has been more than sufficient to solve any issues I have faced.

If I consider how Debian can be improved, it could be more accessible in making newer software versions available for users who need recent features while still maintaining default stable behavior. While backports help, the workflow could be streamlined. The release cycle can feel slow for rapidly evolving tools, and better guidance around mixing stable, backports, and testing would help.

Regarding hardware support, Debian can be improved by supporting multiple BSPs, making it more versatile in the embedded domain. Hardware support for new devices can sometimes lag behind, which is understandable given Debian's focus on stability. Clearer guidance on handling newer hardware or firmware would be beneficial.

From my college time onward, I have been using Linux and Debian distribution, so I have been using Debian for approximately six years.

On a scale of one to ten, I would give Debian an eight.

I rate Debian an eight out of ten because it excels in stability, reliability, and package management, which are very important for long-running production systems. What keeps it from being a perfect score is mainly the slow access to newer software and hardware support, as well as documentation that is somewhat fragmented for advanced use cases. These are trade-offs rather than flaws, but they do affect flexibility for some projects.

Before using Debian, we had experience with other Linux distributions, mainly Ubuntu-based systems and some vendor-provided Linux images. We decided to use Debian because we needed a more stable and predictable base, especially for long-running systems where frequent changes or upgrades could cause issues. Debian's updates and clean package management gave us more control over system behavior.

Debian support is excellent. While it does not have traditional paid customer support like some commercial distributions, the Debian community and documentation are very strong. I find that relying on community support and documentation has been more than sufficient to solve any issues I have faced.

Positive

Before using Debian, we had experience with other Linux distributions, mainly Ubuntu-based systems and some vendor-provided Linux images. We decided to use Debian because we needed a more stable and predictable base, especially for long-running systems where frequent changes or upgrades could cause issues. Debian's updates and clean package management gave us more control over system behavior.

We did not track formal ROI metrics, but we clearly observe returns in terms of time saved and reduced maintenance efforts. Debian's stability leads to fewer production issues, emergencies, fixes, and less time spent on system recovery, improving overall engineering efficiency. For example, we had fewer post-update failures and rollbacks, which saved debugging time and reduced downtime, allowing the same team to manage systems without needing additional resources. Additionally, there were direct cost savings since Debian has no licensing fees, and we did not require paid support, so it saved us considerable money.

From scratch to deployment, Debian works very well from a cost and license perspective, as there are no licensing fees, which makes setup and scaling more straightforward. The main cost incurred is only in terms of hardware and engineering time, not software licenses.

Before choosing Debian, we evaluated other Linux distributions, mainly Ubuntu and some vendor-specific Linux. Debian's stability, support, and package management made it a better fit for production and embedded systems.

I advise others to use Debian if they need stability and reliability for their software update plans, utilizing backports and manual builds. It is an excellent choice for systems needing long-term support and minimal surprises, although they should be aware that it may not always have the latest packages. Some additional planning, such as using backports and building from source, might be necessary for projects requiring cutting-edge software. Overall, it is a solid choice for production and embedded environments.

I would add that Debian has been a very reliable and stable foundation for all the systems I have worked on. Its package management, transparency, and predictable updates have been extremely helpful, especially for embedded and production environments. Overall, it is a solid operating system for long-term projects, and I would recommend it to anyone who values stability and maintainability. I rate this review at an eight out of ten.

My main use case for Debian involves leveraging Amazon EC2 instances and Kubernetes clusters, EKS, for our day-to-day project work, which helps us to keep track of our projects. Using Amazon Machine Images, we get control over tightening security and providing only limited amounts of root user access via Debian to a specific number of users so that any mishaps in high environments would not incur faulty changes made by internal users or external hackers. Debian is excellent for ensuring that only a limited amount of privileges can be granted via its shell and everything remains locked if a session is active. This is what Debian secures, and it is one of the leading operating system packages and machine images in the industry.

I manage security controls on Debian by leveraging user privileges through creating new system users. Root level access is provided only to root IAM users so that only they have full access control. Other users rely only on normal user privileges where they are allowed read-only access for Debian controls.

The best features Debian offers include a very good amount of operating system patching and regular updates on a consistent basis, which makes Debian a better option than other operating system patch versions. Currently, the release fixes and other fixes are much faster and the latest stable versions are also quick compared to other packages and operating system patches like Ubuntu. This makes it a very good critical solution with rapid updates, keeping everything stable among other environments.

There was a time when these quick updates made a difference in my work. A CVE related to one cron timer package was on the higher end of severity. Debian was one of the first machine images which released that patch in the 12.8 release, which helped us solve this issue and move forward with the next updated version as soon as possible.

The key features of Debian that I can precisely mention include the foundation and the fact that it is open source, which helps us run the environment in normal architecture with diverse hardware such as ARM64 and AMD64. The foundations are solid regarding the same and the latest stable versions are updated regularly. The core applications are also very good, particularly the software stack which gets updated from well-known sources such as Python and OpenJDK.

Debian has positively impacted my organization, and I have noticed specific improvements since adopting it. Upon adopting Debian changes, the organization has taken good initiatives so that security patches and releases are managed regularly so that no vulnerability is left open and no external hackers or inexperienced professionals are able to compromise any data security.

There are certain areas where Debian can definitely improve, particularly in restricted access privileges for certain aspects. Certain features should be provided only to specific users, such as normal SSH and secure shell access which should be provided in a limited manner. Cron job inclusion cannot be provided to everyone. These are features which can be added.

I would like to mention that robustness can be improved and IPtables configuration and certain other firewall configuration can be improved rather than relying on third-party packages. This way, Debian can be improved so that network calls can be monitored and reviewed.

There are certain user guides in the open source GitHub that could be updated over these features which can be a good resource for users so that they can keep track of what they are implementing and what the scope of work needs to be. Because Debian is one of the most important software used around the world and the firmware upgrades are quite good. Hardware support is also updated regularly. Time-to-time updates regarding the packages and security concerns need to be managed, and there can be much more traceable IPtable configurations so that people can understand what happens when a new connection is established on the machine. Everything can be tracked through some kind of notification service so that the root level can also monitor if this amount of traffic is normal or if someone is trying to DDoS the secure shell.

I have been using Debian for around three years with Amazon Machine Images.

Debian is quite stable, and the testing cycles in Debian are quite good.

Debian's scalability is quite good. It handles a good amount of traffic and can easily manage around 50,000 users and 50,000 requests with our application currently.

I have not interacted with Debian's customer support or their support channels yet.

Previously, from the very beginning, our architect mentioned that we would look to Debian as this was one of the better options in the marketplace. We examined this solution based on our architecture discussion, and Debian seemed better than Fedora and Mint. The main reason was that latest updates are already being implemented in Debian rather than Fedora and Mint.

I have seen a return on investment using Debian. The least amount of privileges which we provide and the investment cost which we incurred on another machine images were comparatively lower. We saved around $150 per month regarding the same.

The portion regarding pricing was not being managed by myself. This was handled by another team because we request this from another team and they actually set up this portion for our team so that we can deploy and test our applications.

Before choosing Debian, I evaluated other options such as Fedora and Mint.

Majority of the things in Debian packages are handled using this, and all security packages are scanned on a daily basis so that any vulnerability does not emerge. A system cron job is also added in Debian console so that regular scans and updates are reflected on our Power BI dashboard via that system cron job, allowing the leadership and organization level to get updates regularly on what is happening in the background.

A specific example that shows how Debian made a positive impact is in recent scenarios. In the 12.18 version, Debian actually provided very good faster patching, which helped us resolve that CVE as soon as possible. Timely updates and providing open source helps Debian packages to be updated by the open source community as well and mark down those packages which are critical and high so that everyone gets to know what is happening in the background. Keeping everything open source helps grow the community and also lets others know what is happening as well.

My advice to others looking into using Debian is that they can explore multiple operating system patch and image options, but the shipping mechanism of Debian is much wider and the community can be quite large. The updates are maintained consistently. Debian is quite good, and I hope future releases are much better with new features being added regularly so that it takes and stays relevant and competitive in the market with other operating system patches.

I rate Debian overall at an 8 out of 10 based on performance and the scale with which it works, the release and updates, and a few areas for improvement that I have mentioned previously. I have cut two marks for the improvements needed, but everything else is quite good.

My main use case for Debian is primarily server-side and IoT, or Internet of Things devices. I work with small devices like a Raspberry or an ESP32 for small local software solutions or small hardware devices.

One specific example of how I use Debian on those devices is a Wi-Fi captive portal. When a customer enters the public Wi-Fi, they receive a Wi-Fi captive portal, which enables them to log in and use the company Wi-Fi while being registered and monitored. This includes some web application services and IPtables, which is the firewall, providing a secure environment for customers to access the company's Wi-Fi network.

Regarding my main use case with Debian, I also have website applications on the server side that are on the internal domain. For example, I have a building that is part of the company, and I want to monitor IP cameras or security features detecting motion, checking the temperature, and ensuring the fire alarm is working.

Debian offers features that are best for my needs, including being open source, which allows for the implementation of many things and the use of a wide variety of open-source tools. It is excellent for developing in a really short time, and it is also very sustainable and stable, meaning it works without any major software updates, and once you program it, it should be done.

Debian's stability and open-source nature have helped me in my work. For instance, I used to have a Windows-based server, which required a lot of dependency on third-party software, making it high-maintenance and costly. In contrast, with Debian, I can develop quickly with any code language, such as Python, Java, or JavaScript. The switch I made over the past three years made the process significantly less labor-intensive and maintenance-free.

In terms of cybersecurity, there is a Debian-based Linux operating system called Kali Linux. It has a wide range of tools helpful for penetration testing and network security. This aspect is intriguing and educational, whether for personal exploration or for the company if you want to dive into security topics such as zero-day exploits.

In terms of usability and integration with other systems, regarding sustainability, Debian is very user-friendly because the applications I use are most frequently web-based. As long as the system has a supported web browser, it works across different platforms including Mac, Windows, Android, or iOS, and that is where its user-friendliness shines.

Debian has positively impacted my organization primarily in cost-efficiency, with on-premises hardware running faster and cheaper.

Although I find the documentation very helpful and mostly utilize features built into the system itself or open forums, it would be nice to see a comprehensive website that encompasses not only Debian but also other Linux operating systems such as Red Hat or resources for IoT.

In my current field, I have been working for over ten years, but my current job is for approximately four years.

Debian is very stable, and I have experienced no issues whatsoever.

In terms of scalability, Debian on-premises is not very scalable because it depends on your hardware. However, solutions such as Amazon Web Services offer great scalability and flexibility.

I have never needed to reach out for customer support with Debian.

Before switching to Debian, I used Windows because it was higher maintenance and more costly.

Regarding return on investment, although I needed more employees, I cut down on licensing and maintenance costs, estimating around sixty percent savings percentage-wise.

My experience with Debian's pricing, setup cost, and licensing has been that it is all free.

I did not evaluate other options before choosing Debian; I went straight to it because it suited all my needs.

My advice for others looking into using Debian is to first build your own system as a proof of concept. Look for the applications or software you need by starting with Ubuntu if necessary, and then make it more efficient by removing unnecessary components. For example, if you do not need a graphical user interface because you are only using it server-side, then you should choose a lighter variant. I would rate this experience as an eight out of ten.

My main use case for Debian at work and personally is for software that is only supported by Linux, and I primarily use Debian for anything Linux related because it's the most supported option. It's very easy to set up, and very easy to install software on it. We use it for testing scripts, Linux scripts, or bash scripting, and for integrations that are not supported by Windows. Cybersecurity solutions like pen testing tools all rely on it. Sometimes we use Kali Linux, but we use Debian particularly because it's available on AWS, while Kali Linux is not available there. When we want to create a Linux-based virtual machine, especially on the cloud like AWS, we always go for Debian.

I have used Debian extensively to automate tasks on the cloud like Terraform, where I would use one Debian virtual machine as a command and control center for managing other Debian-based Linux machines. Additionally, I integrate it with Ansible for further automation.

The best features Debian offers include compatibility and the wide range of software available on it, along with flexibility. The commands and most tutorials or documentation online for anything you need are always mainly built for Debian. It's much easier to find resources for Debian compared to other Linux distributions.

Debian's compatibility and flexibility have significantly helped me in my work. For example, if I want to install any prerequisites for software on Debian, it's very easy to use the default commands for installing software such as APT-get, and I always find the package I want to install compatible and available in any of Debian's libraries or repos. When I try the same on Kali Linux or CentOS, I almost always struggle to find the packages easily, but for Debian, I always find what I need.

Debian has positively impacted my organization by making it much easier for the technical team. If we had forced our team to use Kali Linux or any other Linux-based distributions, they would struggle more to complete projects that rely on Linux. Debian is the most straightforward and compatible option, which greatly simplifies our engineers' tasks.

This ease of use with Debian has translated into results for our team by saving time and reducing errors. For example, when deploying a Linux-based application or software for one of our customers, since it's most likely compatible with Debian, the team can concentrate on implementing the product and installing it without working around limitations or compatibility issues.

I wish the company responsible for Debian would send communications about updates and new features to keep people informed and to give Debian the recognition and praise that it deserves.

I have been using Debian on and off depending on the projects I work on and for personal use in lab testing and internal applications for my company since I was studying in university and throughout my experience over the past five years.

In my experience, Debian is very stable.

The scalability of Debian for our organization depends on our requirements. We don't spin up new Debian instances arbitrarily. We deploy machines for lab testing or specific projects as needed, some being temporary for testing purposes.

We rely on community resources for support, such as documentation, forums, and asking questions online. It's very easy to find reliable tutorials and guides. However, we've never reached out for official support or dealt with Debian's vendor tickets, as we manage everything ourselves by utilizing open-source resources.

Neutral

I used to rely heavily on Windows before switching to Debian. With Windows, you need a license and must ensure that all the software you try to install supports Windows. A lot of software relies on Linux, which made the transition to Debian easier.

I have seen a return on investment using Debian. We were able to save a substantial amount by using Linux instead of Windows and spending a lot of money on Windows licenses.

Regarding pricing, setup cost, and licensing, we have a certain amount of credit on AWS, and as long as I remain within the limit of that credit, I can create machines as much as I want without exceeding the monthly limit.

Before choosing Debian, we evaluated other options like Ubuntu, Kali Linux, and CentOS, but many of them have additional costs such as support licensing, even though they are still cheaper than Windows. Debian stood out as the most compatible option, being the most stable with frequent updates and reliable backward support, making it the best choice for us.

Other vendors should consider preparing AWS market-ready instances that are based on Debian. Offering ready-to-spin virtual machines that are packaged with their software would be beneficial.

My advice to others looking into using Debian is to assess their current pain points if they are using Windows or another Linux distribution and check if Debian resolves those issues. It's more compatible with solutions they may already have deployed on other operating systems, and I'm confident they'll find it to be a better and more cost-effective choice.

My additional thoughts about Debian are that the best part is the community, the resources available online, and how easy it makes it for technical users. I truly appreciate that I've never struggled to achieve or implement something on Debian. If I don't know how, I can always search online and find someone who has already done it, along with tutorials or documentation available online. I would rate my overall experience with Debian highly based on its stability, compatibility, and strong community support.

On the personal side, I use Debian desktop, which is a lightweight way for me to get work done and do software development. On the professional side, we have Debian servers that host web applications and execute droplets on servers that containerize applications.

We use Debian in our professional environment to host an N8N droplet for automations, specifically work automations. We have a container on a Debian server for a couple of our web applications. We have a web application that helps us manage our support inquiries and a web application that helps our clients engage with their patients. Some of those are Debian, and some of those are Ubuntu.

I have also used Debian via WSL, Windows Subsystem for Linux, which is another personal use case for software engineering via VS Code.

We use Debian deployments primarily on cloud providers such as AWS and Google Cloud. I mostly use AWS for our Debian deployments, but we also use DigitalOcean.

Debian offers the best features in that it is open source, simple, and battle-tested, with a good release cycle. I appreciate their waterfall methodology; if it is not broken, do not fix it. Debian operates a very important place in the market, particularly around web-related services that need to be resilient and long-lasting. I believe Debian is fantastic.

Debian's release cycle is a philosophy that makes sense for organizations that have a very nimble and quick release cycle, while other distros that are more waterfall-like test things every few years and ship new releases every few years. There are pros and cons to both approaches.

I believe security on Debian is top-notch due to its long history and the many individuals and organizations that rely on it, meaning there are many eyes on it. Reliability and security are fantastic; I have never had any issues with either. I would say package management could be a little easier to use, install, reinstall, and roll back packages. It seems there should be a more deterministic way to do that. It does seem that you are running a lot of random install scripts to install things or relying on another two or three package management services, so there could be better software installation methods.

Maybe apt, the package management tool, could have some efficiencies added to allow one to roll back more easily and keep a log. Debian does have some logs that show recent changes, but it is still a little hard to roll back or know what changes were made when; the interface is not as clean as it could be.

The installer experience with Debian is not great, but it is not terrible now. With AI, it is pretty easy to follow the basic steps to get it going. Most people setting up Linux are often using a distro based on Debian rather than vanilla Debian.

Debian is stable.

Debian's scalability is great; I have had no issues with scalability, reliability, or stability.

I rely on forums and online research for customer support and do not know if Debian has official customer support.

Neutral

There is not really another option besides Windows, which is not a good option. We have never used it because it is complicated and not as reliable on the server side. Even on desktop, Debian is very complicated to install and set up, but if you can get past that learning curve and set up a simple system that does just what you want, you unlock all sorts of capabilities that you just cannot get from other desktop operating systems like Windows or Mac.

The installer experience with Debian is not great, but it is not terrible now. With AI, it is pretty easy to follow the basic steps to get it going. Most people setting up Linux are often using a distro based on Debian rather than vanilla Debian.

My advice for others looking into using Debian depends on their purpose. It is different advice for using Debian on the desktop versus for a server. If you are using it over AWS or something, there is not much advice needed since cloud providers have their own interfaces. For running a Debian server, there is a lot of advice online that I am not qualified to give. For the desktop, be prepared for a lot of tweaking and configuration since you are starting with a blank slate and building from there. Many features that come on Windows and Mac are not necessary and can bloat the experience.

I found this interview to be a little less applicable for Debian, so you might want to have different review prompts or templates depending on the type of technology you are reviewing or interviewing for. My overall rating for Debian is nine out of ten.

My main use case is about server handling, creating pipelines, and maintaining Docker images that have been used in the DevOps field.

The work involves going into the server, running APT updates, maintaining the packages that are there, and checking all vulnerabilities that exist. I then fix those vulnerabilities using different packages, upgrade those packages, and install new packages as needed.

Debian functions as an umbrella where you will find all those packages that are available for Ubuntu as well as for different operating systems. I feel that Debian is one of the origins from which it all started, so contributing to it makes me feel special.

Debian has impacted my work significantly. All the upstream servers are on Ubuntu or Debian and I have to fix issues on them. That is what I have been working on.

Debian always provides zero downtime because all that is needed is to run pseudo APT upgrade and it fixes NGINX or the other packages that need to be fixed. It is straightforward to be used because APT is available for that purpose. APT produces Python packages as well as Node packages, and I just need to install them from there rather than having multiple sources.

I feel Debian contributors could receive a stipend. It is open source, but monetary support is always needed.

Because there is always a chance to improve things, I believe there is room for improvement.

I have been working in my current field for the past six years.

Debian is very stable.

It is highly scalable.

Customer support for Debian is very high because everyone is an open-source contributor and there are many people supporting it.

Positive

I have evaluated Alpine images as well as yum packages and RHEL, Red Hat Enterprise Linux, but I felt Debian was better.

There was nothing difficult about the initial setup.

There was nothing difficult about the implementation team requirements.

There were no significant ROI concerns.

Pricing and setup cost were straightforward from Amazon Web Services. I just needed to deploy it and everything worked out.

There were no alternate solutions that I needed to consider.

As a DevOps engineer, my main use case for Debian is that it is my daily driver.

I use Debian in my daily work most of the time for tasks such as installing daemons and servers like Nginx, hosting databases, and creating other workloads.

In addition to my main use case for Debian, I also perform system hardening.

The best features Debian offers are stability and the documentation.

Debian's stability helps me in my daily work because my work relies on stability; I'm trying to deploy production workloads, and Debian offers that stability for me. In addition to the documentation, I can find any part under Debian documentation versus other Linux distros, so it gives me comfort to go through all options.

Debian has positively impacted my organization because it is one of the oldest Linux or GNU/Linux distros, which I believe has the biggest community compared to other Linux distros, so we have a lot of brains.

I believe Debian can be improved by adding more containerization features out of the box, and it should make some updates when it comes to the UI.

In addition to the needed improvements, I think if Debian had a memory-based distribution, similar to Alpine, that would be great, as we could get benefits in terms of memory or embedded systems.

I think Debian needs improvements, especially with GCP, in terms of cloud deployment and integration.

I have been working in my current field for more than nine years.

Debian is stable.

Scalability is good since Debian is totally open source.

Customer support is good.

Neutral

Before switching to Debian, I used Red Hat-based distributions because I am a Red Hat Certified System Administrator and Red Hat Certified System Engineer, and some projects required technical support and licensing for security concerns.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is quite favorable; since Debian is totally free, it is one of my first options.

I have purchased Debian a lot of times through the AWS marketplace before.

I have seen a return on investment; specifically, the cost is around zero because there is no need for a license, and since my whole team uses Debian, we are fine with the number of employees needed.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is quite favorable; since Debian is totally free, it is one of my first options.

Before choosing Debian, I evaluated other options such as Ubuntu and Red Hat-based distributions.

My advice for others looking into using Debian is to read the documentation and take advantage of the big community to ask questions.

Currently, my company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer, but we are looking for this.

I gave this product a rating of nine out of ten.

Debian is used as a Linux distributor for hosting applications, servers, and deployments. The organization primarily relies on Debian for cloud and DevOps, creating Docker images and Kubernetes nodes, and for hosting web servers, databases, or APIs. Debian's package repository is also used for installing tools and software. Debian is deployed in the organization on a public cloud.

Debian offers features such as server hosting for web servers, databases, and APIs. It can be utilized for cloud and DevOps tools, Docker images, and Kubernetes nodes. Debian serves as a base operating system for distributions like Ubuntu and Kali Linux because it is built on a solid foundation. It is highly stable and secure, providing a huge package repository with thousands of applications available. Additionally, Debian is lightweight, open source, and free.

Using Debian allows for hosting production systems securely because it provides regular updates and packages. The huge package repository means thousands of packages are available, making the organization not reliant on third-party packages. Debian is lightweight, so there is no need to pay much for resources, and since it is open source and free, there are no licensing costs.

Debian currently has some older packages that are not available in the latest version. The stable release cycle is slow, where new features come late. Additionally, Debian is not as beginner-friendly as other Linux distributors, requiring more manual setups.

Debian has been used for around six months.

Debian is stable.

The scalability of Debian is good, and the organization is able to scale with deployed servers and applications.

Customer support for Debian is good.

Windows was previously used, which required more money and licensing fees, which is why the switch to Debian was made.

The setup is easy, and no licensing is needed.

About 40% to 50% of costs are saved by using Debian. The return on investment is evident through savings of 40% to 50% in money.

The pricing for Debian is based on what is used and how much is used.

Other options were evaluated, but after reviewing information and feedback, Debian was selected.

Debian is extremely stable, production-ready, and secure with regular updates. It provides a huge package repository, is lightweight, and is free and open source, making it an excellent choice for those seeking these qualities. This review has been given a rating of 8.

For my work and for my customers, I use Debian to cross-build for some other ARM devices that are used for Gilbarco, which are used in many US gas stations to provide fuel to cars. I bought some QEMU to allow developers to run the ARM on computers. I installed Debian on every i.MX8 device, and I think there are thousands in the US market, plus some other thousands worldwide.

Regarding my use case and interesting projects, I recently used Debian for Amazon and then for some other GitHub actions, still as a QEMU.

That long-term support has helped me and my customers by being stable and running well. Debian has positively impacted my organization and my customers.

Regarding needed improvements, I think sudo and the way sudo is configured, with visudo required, would help many newcomers to Debian because the learning curve on the configuration might have some challenges in the way it is done.

About the features of Debian, of course, it is a slow distribution like many others. The setup is fast and efficient, but it is not doing much. I am an embedded developer and a Linux developer, so I am happy with that. I can customize more, but then the hardware support and the packages are old. However, I am looking for stability, so old probably means stable, but it is not for every user.