The Sad State Of Web Browser Support Currently Within Debian

[aht0]

Much less problems than with Windows 10. I had to constantly fix something and it was extremely slow.

Skill issue. Or hardware's (check your drive's health).

Yes I prefer broken and less secure, than nasty suprise in the morning when something stops working after update and I miss the meeting.

Technically W10 is more secure than your Linux (or my BSD). Certificate-protected drivers & system files, automatic system file recovery, built-in malware protection. System files protected from tampering/erasure even when user has administrative privileges (compare it against deleting your fucking / as root). Let me know when some OSS gets there.
Considering Windows is most common attack target, it holds up fairly well.

[LightBit]

It's not only new hardware that faces issues, you must be new to Linux.

Updating before something important is asking for problems, but any sensible person could just roll back their snapshot and reboot. The issues you are seeking to mitigate by using "Old software" aren't half as bad (or difficult/time costly to remedy) as the ones you're introducing by doing so.

When I started to use Linux there was no snapshots. Rolling back would requre my intervention on family computer. It doesn't even solve anything as you would again use old less secure software. Debian stable at least tries to get most things fixed. Many noobs install updates only once a year or so.

I use some software only on every few months and then I figure it doesn't even work anymore and don't even know when it broke. Roll back to what?

I have been using Arch Linux for quite some time in the past, but I don't have time for maintanance anymore.

I see no issues with older software, but when I got new computer I had to use Debian testing. Actually Debian is usually more up to date than RHEL. I wish Debian would release once a year.

Latest dissapoitment was Fedora 34. Worked fine on release day, but before upgrade to Fedora 35 Chromium and Audacity were crashing, decided it won't show WiFi networks on channel 13 anymore ... Nobody even looked at the reported bugs.

[LightBit]

Skill issue. Or hardware's (check your drive's health).

Isn't Windows supposed to be easier to use than Linux?
Slownes was probably caused by HDD. Windows does not like them. It works fine on Linux. S.M.A.R.T. also says it is ok.

Technically W10 is more secure than your Linux (or my BSD). Certificate-protected drivers & system files, automatic system file recovery, built-in malware protection. System files protected from tampering/erasure even when user has administrative privileges (compare it against deleting your fucking / as root). Let me know when some OSS gets there.
Considering Windows is most common attack target, it holds up fairly well.

Not sure what's your point here. I do have many issues with Windows, but security is not one of them.

Basically you listed some things I hate about Windows 10. Malware protection that cannot be permanently disabled and file locking ... If I want to delete my fuckin' root folder, I will do it. You can setup SELinux so you can't delete root folder, if you want. So skill issue.

I had no saftey issue on Windows or Linux.

Again I don't know why are you trying to sell me Windows on Linux forum. I hope Microsoft pays you well.

[ssokolow]

Yeah I read what you said but it only added to the confusion since you started about talking about RPM based ecosystems and then switched to an apparent comparison between Red Hat and SUSE and it wasn't clear why the underlying package format was relevant but I see this now essentially boils to some UI preferences on the web interface which is fine.

If you want to compare Zypper or DNF (which share some of the same underlying libraries including libsolv which is known for it's high performance and ability to resolve complex dependencies correctly). with Apt, you would need good objective benchmarks taking into account network and caching mode differences. If you are aware of any, feel free to link to them.

Honestly, benchmarks can be very misleading so, even if I find some, I wouldn't consider them applicable until I'd done my own "Pull a spare PC out of the closet, install distro in question on it, drop all caches, and run task X under time or hyperfine" testing, paired with keeping an eye out for perceived differences that need to be investigated.

That said, given that I'm a KDE user who runs LTS distros and doesn't like rpmfind.net, that rules out GNOME-centric, "beta for RHEL" Fedora, so I'll be starting with SUSE if I find Kubuntu LTS has become unsuitable and need to investigate RPM alternatives.

[Danielsan]

Technically W10 is more secure than your Linux (or my BSD). Certificate-protected drivers & system files, automatic system file recovery, built-in malware protection. System files protected from tampering/erasure even when user has administrative privileges (compare it against deleting your fucking / as root). Let me know when some OSS gets there.
Considering Windows is most common attack target, it holds up fairly well.

Is this a joke?

[tildearrow]

I don't understand what to make of this - are you trying to insult me? Well, fuck off then. Your reasoning was flawed and totally illogical, and you failed. Maybe you oculd admit it.

I am done. I hope Michael clears you out of this forum for good.

What about you admit you're here only to start annoyingly repetitive disputes?
If there are people who want to use Debian, let them. It will be their problem if web browser support is poor.

[EndOfFile]

I am done. I hope Michael clears you out of this forum for good.

What about you admit you're here only to start annoyingly repetitive disputes?
If there are people who want to use Debian, let them. It will be their problem if web browser support is poor.

I think my biggest issue is that it seems he was intentionally trolling as I was essentially agreeing. I was only trying to ask the question if there was some reason not to just use the FF binaries direct from Mozilla.

It doesn't really matter though. This was my first, and now last, interaction here on the forums. Also cancelled my supporter subscription. I don't need to pay to put up with people like that.

[sadoon_albader]

I use some software only on every few months and then I figure it doesn't even work anymore and don't even know when it broke. Roll back to what?

That is exactly the issue with the "just roll back to a snapshot" routine. I've had btrfs snapshots with Arch in all the 4 years I've used it. Sometimes you might update on Saturday and you won't realize something has broken until Wednesday, or worse, you'll realize weeks or months later.
Snapshots won't help there.
Anything that is not a point release is inherently higher maintenance, that's just the way it is. Anything that is point release will have older software as time goes on, that's just the way it is.
I find both useful: I use debian (or a derivative) as my main OS, and I use Arch in a chroot for updated software. It's an excellent solution that *just works*
Maybe someone could come up with a distro that does both of these things right, would be a killer feature to have, and extra points if it's all seamless and noob friendly.

[Duff~]

Go woke, get broke.
Less money waste on diversity and more money to browser support (or any money, mailing list maintainers claim they're volunteers).

[Sonadow]

Is this a joke?

Someone who has never really used Windows or dug deep into what it offers calling someone else who has a joke.

Fantastic.