Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
CoreOS vs Debian vs Ubuntu: What are the differences?
Key Differences between CoreOS, Debian, and Ubuntu
CoreOS, Debian, and Ubuntu are three popular Linux distributions that serve different purposes and have unique features. In this comparison, we will highlight the key differences between them.
-
Container-focused vs General-purpose:
- CoreOS is a lightweight and container-focused operating system designed for clustered deployments, making it ideal for running containerized applications at scale.
- Debian and Ubuntu, on the other hand, are more general-purpose operating systems that can be used for various purposes including desktop, server, and cloud environments.
-
Update Model:
- CoreOS utilizes an automatic and rolling update model, where the entire operating system is replaced with each update. This enables seamless and self-healing updates, ensuring that all nodes in the cluster are running the same version at all times.
- Debian and Ubuntu follow a more traditional package-based update model, where individual packages are updated independently. This gives users more control over the update process and allows for selective package updates.
-
Package Management:
- CoreOS uses the lightweight
Container Linux Update Operatorfor managing system updates, which leverages theCoreUpdateframework. It provides automatic updates for the operating system and supports complex update strategies. - Debian and Ubuntu use
aptpackage management system, offering a vast repository of packages that can be easily installed, updated, and removed using various command-line tools. They also support package version pinning and dependency management.
- CoreOS uses the lightweight
-
Systemd vs Init System:
- CoreOS uses
systemdas its init system, which is a modern and more feature-rich init system that provides advanced service management capabilities. - Debian and Ubuntu traditionally used
SysVinitas their init system, but have now transitioned tosystemdas the default init system. However, they still offer compatibility with SysVinit and provide tools for managing service startup and shutdown.
- CoreOS uses
-
Default Installation:
- CoreOS is primarily installed via disk images or cloud-provided images, and it comes pre-configured for running in a clustered environment. It is designed to be lightweight and minimal, with a focus on security and stability.
- Debian and Ubuntu offer various installation options, including desktop and server editions, allowing users to choose the packages and software they want to install. They provide more flexibility and customization options compared to CoreOS.
-
Community and Support:
- Debian has a large and active community of developers and users, which translates into extensive documentation, support forums, and a wide range of third-party software and tools.
- Ubuntu, based on Debian, has a large and diverse community as well, with additional official commercial support options available. It also benefits from regular releases and long-term support (LTS) versions, making it suitable for both desktop and enterprise use.
In summary, CoreOS is a container-focused operating system with an automatic update model, while Debian and Ubuntu are more general-purpose distributions with a package-based update model. CoreOS is designed for clustered deployments and offers a lightweight footprint, while Debian and Ubuntu provide more flexibility and customization options, with a larger community and extensive support.
Ubuntu always let people do what they want to do, it pushes its users to know what they are doing, what they want and helps them learn what they ignore.
Ubuntu is simple, works out-of-the-box after installation and has a incredibly huge community behind.
Ubuntu is lightweight and open, in the way, that the user has access to free AND efficient applications (most of the time, without ads) and, even if learning its folder structure is challenging, once done, you are really able to call yourself "someone who knows what is in your computer".
Windows, in comparison, is heavy, tends to make decision for you and always enable tracking application by default. grr
It has a simple user interface, of course, but on the stability point of view, it is hard to compete with something simpler (even with less features).
Personal preference : I prefer something simple that works 99% of the time, than a full-featured auto-magical system that works 50% of the time (and ask if the good version of the driver is really installed...)
Coming from a Debian-based Linux background, using the Ubuntu base image for my Docker containers was a natural choice. However, the overhead, even on the impressively-slimmed Hub images, was hard to justify. Seeking to create images that were "just right" in size, without unused packages or dependencies, I made the switch to Alpine.
Alpine's modified BusyBox has a surprising amount of functionality, and the package repository contains plenty of muslc-safe versions of commonly-used packages. It's been a valuable exercise in doing more with less, and, as Alpine is keen to point out, an image with fewer packages makes for a more sustainable environment with a smaller attack surface.
My only regret is that Alpine's documentation leaves a lot to be desired.
Ubuntu is much more faster over Windows and helps to get software and other utilities easier and within a short span of time compared to Windows.
Ubuntu helps to get robustness and resiliency over Windows. Ubuntu runs faster than Windows on every computer that I have ever tested. LibreOffice (Ubuntu's default office suite) runs much faster than Microsoft Office on every computer that I have ever tested.
Global familiarity, free, widely used, and as a debian distro feels more comfortable when rapidly switching between local macOS and remote command lines.
CentOS does boast quite a few security/stability improvements, however as a RHEL-based distro, differs quite significantly in the command line and suffers from slightly less frequent package updates. (Could be a good or bad thing depending on your use-case and if it is public facing)
At the moment of the decision, my desktop was the primary place I did work. Due to this, I can't have it blow up on me while I work. While Arch is interesting and powerful, Ubuntu offers (at least for me) a lot more stability and lets me focus on other things than maintaining my own OS installation.
Pros of CoreOS
- Container management20
- Lightweight15
- Systemd9
Pros of Debian
- Massively supported54
- Stable50
- Reliable21
- Aptitude9
- Customizable8
- It is free8
- Turnkey linux use it8
- Works on all architectures6
Pros of Ubuntu
- Free to use230
- Easy setup for testing discord bot96
- Gateway Linux Distro57
- Simple interface54
- Don't need driver installation in most cases9
- Open Source6
- Many active communities6
- Software Availability3
- Easy to custom3
- Many flavors/distros based on ubuntu2
- Lightweight container base OS1
- Great OotB Linux Shell Experience1
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
Cons of CoreOS
- End-of-lifed3
Cons of Debian
- Old versions of software10
- Can be difficult to set up on vanilla Debian2
Cons of Ubuntu
- Demanding system requirements5
- Adds overhead and unnecessary complexity over Debian4
- Snapd installed by default2
- Systemd1
Sign up to add or upvote consMake informed product decisions
What is CoreOS?
What is Debian?
What is Ubuntu?
Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
What companies use CoreOS?
Sign up to get full access to all the companiesMake informed product decisions
What tools integrate with Debian?
Sign up to get full access to all the tool integrationsMake informed product decisions
Blog Posts
+9
+33
+23
+17