So as of today the latest "stable" release of Debian is a month old.
By contrast the last stable release of Fedora is Fedora 43, released on October 28, 2025 which four months old at this point.
Really once you get software that works all of this is pointless anyway, you have working software and you update once every year or so, or when you find you need to.
When you "need" to update is so personal that it cannot be predicted, but your FUD about Debian being universally old and outdated is clearly misleading at best and deliberately misleading at worst.
Debian Trixie, to my knowledge, comes with Linux kernel 6.12 LTS. Many people with more modern hardware want the most modern Linux kernel -- currently 6.18 -- to support their devices. There are also countless stabilization patches (I heard some of my acquaintances praising their Linux kernel upgrades as finally giving them access to all features of various Bluetooth periphery but did not ask for details).
Having a modern kernel is important. With Debian though, it's a friction.
Can it still be done? Sure, or at least I hope so as I want to repurpose my gaming machine as a remote worker / station and the only viable choice inside WSL2 is Debian. I do hope I can somehow make Debian install a 6.18 kernel.
Furthermore, you putting the word "need" in quotes implies non-determinism or even capriciousness -- those two cannot be further from the truth.
Arch and Fedora can't come to WSL2 soon enough.
...and none of that is even touching on the issue of much older versions of all software in there. I want the latest Neovim, for example. For objective developer experience reasons.
Debian stable is for purists or server admins. Not for users.
There’s the backports repository.
Also the terminal is the main interface for Linux and the BSDs. Why does having to learn it is a nevative. A computer is not a toy. You don’t drive a truck with no training.
Admitting that getting 6.18 on Debian is some sort of insurmountable mountain is not something I would do in public while trying to show off my expertise. I'm not running it, because I don't need a kernel that's been out for 5 minutes and offers me nothing that can't wait a month or two. I'm running what's current on testing, which is 6.17.13. It's about a minute of work to switch to testing. I run stable on all my servers, and testing on my laptops, it is a triviality. But to all you bleeding edge software people, it's somehow rocket surgery.
> Many people with more modern hardware want the most modern Linux kernel
To run the latest version of Progress Quest. Need biggest number available.
> Arch and Fedora can't come to WSL2 soon enough.
So, it's really still Windows, then. I assume you've moved from spending years ranting about how Linux people were purist server admins and Windows was for users and just worked, and now you've chosen the same posture after being pushed out of Windows.
> Debian stable is for purists or server admins. Not for users.
You're not a typical user. Most users want a functional computer, not the largest numbers they can find.
I genuinely don't care to show off expertise. I just want a distro that works.
All the best.
Have you used Fedora? After using Fedora I was actually offended how bad Windows was and how bad Debian family was.
Its the best OS I've used in my lifetime by what feels like an order of magnitude.
My only terminal commands were to unblock some minecraft ports for my kid. You won't find a Ubuntu/Debian user with that experience.
We're so fucked from a security perspective.