Having used all three branches of debian i eventually realised that neither testing nor sid ever gave me anything i could not get on debian stable . Besides i really felt like managing the constant waves of updates mostly for libraries and kernels forced me to always be on the look out for potential issues even though i never had any crash . i just eventually realised that rolling types of systems were just not for me . Anyway thats just my experience and opinions .
There are good, well managed rolling releases. ā¦ Void, Gentoo, Solus, Artix ā¦ it all depends on the dedication and skills of the people behind the distro.
Debian sid was never managed as a proper rolling release ā¦ it is just their current workplace.
Thank you. Once I read somewhere that Ubuntu was based on testing branch. as it seemed to be believable I accepted it as a fact without checking it, and never had the idea to check it really.
I was obviously wrong then.
Thanks for the heads up!
When I read the bit about testing and unstable ā¦ then to add ubuntu flavour and put it into mintā¦ how do you find any error and who would be responsable for its fix.
Why not use a stable working version ?
Debian stable does not have the latest kernels and drivers.
I guess Ubuntu wanted to start with something more up to date, rather than have to add a whole heap of things to make it work on new hardware.
The creator of the distro of courseā¦
LMDE just did it 
Anyway, sticking everywhere only to Debian stable would slow down progression.
Since I moved to Debian (stable) Iām just a happy every-day user.
I highly appreciate the work of Canonical and the enthusiasm of Ubuntu users, without them my Debian version wasnāt that good, as thereās a huge lot of users out there, to find, face and report bugs and problems before they eventually would land in Debian stable 
That is what I am using on my Dell XPS, you add what you need, unlike Mint, Ubuntu or LMDE, they are just too bloated for my liking!!
Iām curious, Daniel. What do you consider bloat? With Windows, itās endless trial versions with hidden cancellation options and constant ads for Micro$oft apps. I donāt see much in Debian or Mint or Ubuntu that isnāt useful.
Not getting into this discussion with you!! First, I have no issue with W11, it works, that is all I need!! Second, when I compare Debian stable and what has been installed, the difference is obvious!! The last time I used Ubuntu or Mint, I spent more time updating than using the distro!!
I may regret this but ā¦
When I run an update on lmde, it happens when I choose to do it, it happens in back ground, and perhaps a couple of times a year needs a restart. Last windows one i did for a client took ages to download, then restarted twice, and failed some had to roll back, then the next day had another update it chose to do as I was trying to demo to the client the virus had gone. Only thing it enable me to do was sell him a linux laptop instead.
Agree office, scanner, printer, image viewer etc all come packed in and useful. Only things I dont use perhaps are the mail and transmission tools but I remove them and they are so tiny anyway.
Considering disk space windows vs linux its less than half the space all in where windows you just keep adding and paying for office photo editing tools etc.
I just installed LMDE, did all the updates, set up my printers, and added my most-used apps to the panel. My coffee barely got cold. When I turn on my W11 machine after a week of disuse, I have to spend time clearing up the crap that has accumulated.
What are you doing differently with Mint?
Try again, that is unusual for any Linux distro.
Not even an active rolling release distro like Void takes that much time doing updates. ā¦ my Void is about 2 minutes per week. It has about the same amount of updates as Gentoo, but there is no compiling.
Surely Mint and Ubuntu are no worse than Void ?
Read this
There is someone who wants a lot of fancy settings but is still happy with Ubuntu.
Not true for me using Mint Cinnamon.