Hence, what would be your recommendations and why? Keep in mind that I need Linux for work, thus, seeking for stability and speed over fun and gloom.
What does that mean 'I need Linux for work'? Do we interpret this as - my Linux must be Debian based or a derivative?
gerard4143
Nearly a Posting Maven
2,272 posts since Jan 2008
Reputation Points: 512
Solved Threads: 387
As said, why would you want to have the latest everything all the time?
There's no need to upgrade every 6 months, let alone every few days.
Just pick a release that works for you (which will usually be the latest release at time of installation) and stick with it.
My old Linux server ran the same Debian release for several years before I replaced the entire machine with another one which then got installed with a version of Ubuntu I'd lying around. That one never got upgraded either until it was thrown out.
Current server runs Windows Vista simply because I couldn't be bothered to try to get Linux running on that laptop (usually I push old machines into a server role).
As to X vs. Y, I'm always extremely sceptical against anyone claiming such things.
There is no fight, there is no war, both can, do, and will coexist. Each has its purpose, each has its niche, its market.
jwenting
duckman
8,392 posts since Nov 2004
Reputation Points: 1,662
Solved Threads: 337
As a Windows replacement for non-technical users, Mint or Ubuntu would be a better choice as there's less hacking in config files etc. to be done to get (and keep!) things working.
For servers, Debian is a better bet as it's more tweakable for optimal performance.
jwenting
duckman
8,392 posts since Nov 2004
Reputation Points: 1,662
Solved Threads: 337
All depends on your configuration. Ubuntu might install heavier frontends by default, doesn't mean it's more of a resource hog in theory though.
jwenting
duckman
8,392 posts since Nov 2004
Reputation Points: 1,662
Solved Threads: 337