this post was submitted on 19 Feb 2025
-16 points (21.4% liked)

Linux

6067 readers
460 users here now

A community for everything relating to the GNU/Linux operating system

Also check out:

Original icon base courtesy of lewing@isc.tamu.edu and The GIMP

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I started with mint more than 10 years ago because a friend of mine told me it was one, if not the best, distro for newbies (that was a fucking lie). Idk how mint is doing today but back then was kind of a mess and dealing with it wasnt easy, so i dont really know how or why i switched to debian for a while. With debian i had a lot of problems with some software, mostly proprietary drivers for esotic hardware i was running back then due to me buying the cheapest laptops available, so i started distro hopping for a while. Every distro but fedora was debian based so it felt a lot like a more of the same experience and I felt stuck in a loop where i was eventually gonna reinstall my whole system after breaking something i didnt even know existed.

Then one day i found arch. Installing it wasnt as easy as clicking install on the live system’s guy, but just by following the wiki general instructions i didnt have any issues the first time. It felt good. Building the system block by block helped me understand how things work, the package manager was the best i had seen and the newbie corner basically had the solutions for all my screw-ups, even more than ask-ubuntu did. Everybody in the community was super helpful (even some of the devs). Then there was the AUR, with almost every piece of esotic or proprietary software i needed, much easier than adding some random guy’s repositories to apt or enabling backports on debian. Also i found out that i prefer having a rolling release. With arch i learned how to use and maintain my system, and i just stuck with it.

That said, just how some use linux just to brag about it with their normie friends, many many people use arch to brag about it with other linux users (like my friend did), mostly beacause arch has the infamous reputation that it is hard to install, hard to maintain, easy to break. Which is actually not that bad considering that all these people are gonna end up posting in the newbie corner lol.

Truth is that arch is not harder than any other distro. It only comes down to your will to learn and RTFM What i think worked for me was the transparency. Nobody said it was as easy to use as windows, but nobody in the wiki said “dont do this unless you are an experienced user”. Arch is not another fork of ubuntu pretending to be “even more user friendly”, it’s just arch.

I think the problem is about distros like antergos (rip), manjaro, garuda, endevour trying to oversimplify something that only needs you to RTFM only ending up breaking something they tried to automate and hide behind a curtain that wasnt meant to be automated and was meant to be learned to manage, by hand

Drag doesn't have an opinion one way or the other about this, as drag hasn't used Arch. But drag liked reading this comment and would enjoy reading a discussion about it.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] hendrik@palaver.p3x.de 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Why would that be the case? Arch offers some good tools, good documentation, all to save people time...

And I've been around for some time. I can assure you Linux will be pretty much the same in 5 years time. Minus a few details and intricate details. But I'd say if you had learned how to use the unix commandline in the late 80s, you could still apply a good amount of knowledge today and be more productive than someone without that ability. I'm not that old... But for the last 10 years, I wouldn't say it moves that fast at all. The concepts are super old. And sure, we occasionally switch from Xorg to Wayland... But that took me close to zero effort.

[–] 0101100101@programming.dev 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

To save people the time of not having to read it all to know how to do something so simple as to install it when it could just be made to install itself?

[–] hendrik@palaver.p3x.de 1 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago)

I suppose you do it like with every other operating system... Get the installation media, boot into the live system, and then you run 'archinstall'. It'll ask you a bunch of questions and then install itself.