Hot take: Vanilla Debian distro is mid

[Redaktion]

The landscape of Linux distros would be nothing without the solid foundation that is Debian. However, with most other forks using their flagship distros as a showcase, why doesn't Debian?

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Hot-take-Vanilla-Debian-distro-is-mid.1338890.0.html

[Julian M]

It's an odd take rather than a controversial one.

Debian needs to stay sturdy, serious and boring. I like my home server running steadily without having to worry about some edge stuff breaking it - I don't need fancy, I need reliable.

You want a flashy/niche distro based on it, they are plenty out there, for just about anything you fancy, in any flavour possible.

[captainobvious]

This is the kind of articles you get when NPCs discover Linux.

[Joe]

There IS a direction to Debian, they spend 2 years building it and releasing a Stable version getting mostly security updates for important packages, that's just how it works. You may find it dated, but that just means you're not the intended audience and you prefer bleeding edge software to a rock solid system that's much harder to break if you don't know what you're doing and that's okay, you do you (And you can have a similar experience with Debian Sid too)
But I think your article is ignorant to what Debian is about and aims to achieve.

[St]

Once you set debian stable release desktop, you don't have to deal with spending time on system wide updates - user time labor. The user can focus on using the system. Regular updates always add time tax on end user. Windows is notorious for that. I don't want to be an updater. I want to be a user.