Arch is aimed at people who know their shit so they can build their own distro based on how they imagine their distro to be. It is not a good distro for beginners and non power users, no matter how often you try to make your own repository, and how many GUI installers you make for it. There’s a good reason why there is no GUI installer in arch (aside from being able to load it into ram). That being that to use Arch, you need to have a basic understanding of the terminal. It is in no way hard to boot arch and type in archinstall. However, if you don’t even know how to do that, your experience in whatever distro, no matter how arch based it is or not, will only last until you have a dependency error or some utter and total Arch bullshit® happens on your system and you have to run to the forums because you don’t understand how a wiki works.

You want a bleeding edge distro? Use goddamn Opensuse Tumbleweed for all I care, it is on par with arch, and it has none of the arch stuff.

You have this one package that is only available on arch repos? Use goddamn flatpak and stop crying about flatpak being bloated, you probably don’t even know what bloat means if you can’t set up arch. And no, it dosent run worse. Those 0,0001 seconds don’t matter.

You really want arch so you can be cool? Read the goddamn 50 page install guide and set it up, then we’ll talk about those arch forks.

(Also, most arch forks that don’t use arch repos break the aur, so you don’t even have the one thing you want from arch)

  • ad_on_is@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    On the contrary, I’d still argue it’s a good distro for beginners, but not for newbies. people who are tech-sawy and not hesitant to learn new things.

    I jumped straight into EndeavorOS when I switched to Linux, since arch was praised as the distro for developers, for reasons.

    Sure, I had some issues to fight with, but it taught me about all the components (and their alternatives) that are involved in a distro.

    So, once you have a problem and ask for help, the first questions are sorts of “what DE/WM do you use?.. is it X11 or wayland? are you using alsa or pipewire?”.

    Windows refugees (like me) take so many things for granted, that I think this kind of approach really helps in understanding how things work under the hood. And the Arch-wiki is just a godsend for thst matter. And let’s be real, you rarely look into Arch-wiki for distros other than Arch itself, since they mostly work OOTB.

    • Scrath@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      4 days ago

      The Arch-wiki was my main reason for switching to arch. When I used an ubuntu based distro I felt like I had to rely on forum posts to figure out anything whereas with arch everything is documented incredibly well

      • iriyan@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        True, between arch and gentoo wiki you can hardly find any other information that is worth your while.