> My only gripe with Ubuntu is that apt-get doesn't have the latest stables packages (like Amazon Linux does). I'm guessing it would be the same with Debian.
Depends on your definition of "stable". Since distros vary widely on what they consider to be "stable", comparing various distros' stable releases is like comparing processors by raw GHz values or dSLRs by megapixels alone.
Debian Stable is the last place to go if you want very recent builds of packages, but the first place to go if you want absolute, rock-solid stability.
Debian Sid (unstable) has the latest versions of each of the packages, though Debian's guidelines are strict enough that testing and sid are oftentimes more stable than the "stable" releases of other distros.
My advice (and this is what I do): Run Debian stable (Jessie, as of today) as a base image, and use an appropriate container for applications that require more up-to-date applications. Best of both worlds.
Actually they call it stable because it doesn't change. It achieves a reputation of stability because of the development process and not shipping until bugs are eliminated.
Depends on your definition of "stable". Since distros vary widely on what they consider to be "stable", comparing various distros' stable releases is like comparing processors by raw GHz values or dSLRs by megapixels alone.
Debian Stable is the last place to go if you want very recent builds of packages, but the first place to go if you want absolute, rock-solid stability.
Debian Sid (unstable) has the latest versions of each of the packages, though Debian's guidelines are strict enough that testing and sid are oftentimes more stable than the "stable" releases of other distros.
My advice (and this is what I do): Run Debian stable (Jessie, as of today) as a base image, and use an appropriate container for applications that require more up-to-date applications. Best of both worlds.