• S410@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      7 months ago

      Literally most of them. All the big ones like Debian, Ubuntu, Fedora, OpenSUSE, Arch, etc. are 10+ years old and still get updates pretty much daily.

      Debian had its 30th birthday back in September, actually.

      • mammut@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        7 months ago

        The 30 year old Debian release isn’t getting updates, though. I think that was the point. If you want updates, you gotta upgrade. Windows and Linux are the same that way.

        • S410@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          7 months ago

          It’s not really comparable to the way Windows versioning works. Releases of distros like Debian are closer to Service Packs on Windows: they’re just a bunch of updates bundled together.
          Alternatively, you can use Debian Sid or Arch, for example, and get all the changes as they’re being made. That way, you get a lot of smaller updates a lot more often.

          • FaceDeer@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            Whatever you want to call it, version or service pack, the point is that you’re going to need to be using a relatively recent one to get that free support.

            • S410@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              7 months ago

              You do, in fact, need to accept support to benefit from it. Those releases are the support. Support = updates!

              Sometimes people or companies retire their distros (e.g. Mandriva), or just do stupid decisions that piss of their users (CentOS) and force the users to switch to a different distro. This, however, is extremely rare. Microsoft do that on a schedule.

              • FaceDeer@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                7 months ago

                So update to Windows 11, then. This is how Microsoft has always operated, they’re doing this on their usual schedule.

                • S410@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  You can use Debian Sid, for example. That way, instead of waiting for a bunch of updates to install them as one big upgrade, you, basically, always have the last version. You don’t get those big upgrades at all, this way.

                  That’s not possible with Windows. Even if you were to install every update that comes out, you wouldn’t end up with a system that’s somewhere between Windows 10 and Windows 11. You’re forced into a major upgrade.

                  • FaceDeer@kbin.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    7 months ago

                    And that’s the way Windows’ patches and updates have always worked. This isn’t some amazing new twist that Microsoft has thrown at us. If I’d bought Windows 10 ten years ago, I would have bought it with the full knowledge that at some point it’ll no longer be updatable without it turning into Windows 11.

                    If this is a fundamental obstacle to you then you should never have bought Windows in the first place. It’s like buying a gasoline-powered car and then exclaiming “this is bullshit!” When it comes time to fill the tank.

    • Poggervania@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      Actually, yes.

      Debian has been supported since the early 90s, but admittedly that’s the only one I could name off the top of my head.

      • mammut@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        They’ve not been supporting the same release for that entire time, though. Debian requires you to upgrade to keep getting security patches, the same way Microsoft requires you to upgrade to keep getting security patches.

        • Mininux@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          Yeah, but there is almost never a need for keeping an older version of linux, unlike for Windows 10 since win11 has ridiculous system requirements

          • mammut@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            7 months ago

            I don’t have numbers for how frequently it happens, but the need to use old releases happens on both OSes. If you’re using an architecture that Debian has since dropped support for, you have to stick on the old release. (They stopped supporting one of the MIPS variants recently.)

            Debian also sometimes drops packages because they won’t build on the newer release and there’s no maintainer for the package. Now you need to stay on the old release (or port it to the new libraries yourself) if you wanna keep using it.

        • S410@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          7 months ago

          Debian releases are more similar to Service Packs on Windows.

          Windows releases are entirely different products.

          There are changes to the defaults, sometimes, but they’re just that: changes to the defaults. If you’re upgrading your existing install, they won’t affect you.

          For example: Debian switched to Gnome as its default DE a couple years ago. It used to be XFCE. However, if you already had a system with XFCE, if wouldn’t go and replace it for you.

          On Windows side, meanwhile, when Microsoft decide to change up the DE, you get the changes, whether you like it or not. Remember Windows 8? It’s not like those who upgraded from Windows 7 got to keep their Aero theme and Start Menu.

          • mammut@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            7 months ago

            I disagree that it’s more similar to service packs. Debian has dropped entire architectures at some releases, and they frequently break binary (and sometimes source) compatibility, far more frequently than service packs do. Hardware compatibility breakage is pretty common between releases too.

            It’s probably true that Microsoft changes more between releases, but if you installed Debian on your 32-bit big endian MIPS hardware, you needed to switch to a different OS or buy new hardware when they drop support for Buster.

            • S410@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              7 months ago

              I suppose it’s true for very old or more exotic hardware.
              Since last year we can’t even run Linux on i486 CPUs, and it’s not even some relatively exotic architecture!