I am a Linux noobie and have only used Mint for around six months now. While I have definitely learned a lot, I don’t have the time to always be doing crazy power user stuff and just want something that works out of the box. While I love Mint, I want to try out other decently easy to use distros as well, specifically not based on Ubuntu, so no Pop OS. Is Manjaro a possibly good distro for me to check out?

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    41 year ago

    I disagree. Not everyone wants to spend the time to completely customize their system. Distros like Manjaro and Endeavor give people a decent “just works” install while still giving them experience with the Arch ecosystem. The forums are usually a good resource, and everything on the arch wiki still applies. It might just be because I had previous linux experience, but I’ve learned a lot running Manjaro.

    The average person is not going to jump straight into vanilla Arch as their first distro, but after a couple years with Manjaro, they might try it.

    • ZephrC
      link
      fedilink
      3
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      If you don’t want to spend the time to completely customize your system just don’t use an Arch based system. Seriously. Arch has some neat things about it, but it’s not the magical be all and end all of distros. If you don’t want to use what it’s good at use Mint, or Debian, or PopOS, or Ubuntu, or Fedora, or if you want something bleeding edge use OpenSuse Tumbleweed. You don’t have to use shitty imitation Arch if you don’t want to use Arch. You also don’t need experience with Manjaro to use Arch. I jumped straight into Arch after using Mint for years and it was fine. I still use Mint on my laptop and as a backup on my old drive I moved to my new computer just in case I do something stupid in Arch. Mint is great. I just like playing around with completely customizing my system. Why would you want something Arch based if you don’t care about the main thing it’s actually good at?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        01 year ago

        To answer your question: AUR. Aur is something that I love about Arch.

        Also please stop gatekeeping. Installing Arch by hand instead of using something like EndevaourOS doesn’t mean anything. I used EndevaourOS after using arch simply because it was way faster and easier to configure. It still has all the functionality of arch (since essentially it is arch).

        If you don’t want to spend the time to completely customize your system just don’t use an Arch based system

        Thats the thing. You can still customize everything and anything. I mean what’s stopping you from using a tty and changing things? Also even the installer helps you customize a lot of things…

        • ZephrC
          link
          fedilink
          31 year ago

          I’m not gatekeeping. Arch isn’t fucking magical. Do whatever you want. I just actually don’t get it. What’s the point? I don’t even use the AUR. It’s not that good. It’s an inconsistent mess of janky conflicting build scripts and trust me bro binaries, and you can get basically anything there in almost any distro nowadays. Hell, most of it’s on Flathub. You can also customize anything you want on any distro. Arch is just the easiest one to start from a very minimal system and build something up that’s totally yours. Why use a distro that only takes that away and adds nothing?

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            3
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I agree Arch isn’t magical. And I’m more than aware of the issues with the AUR, however i disagree that everything on there can be found by other means. There are several programs (such as optimus-manager for nvidia and integrated video card laptops) which are pretty much only found on the AUR (Not counting Github). Again this is about ease-of-use (Since you could build my example from github as well).

            Obviously you can customize anything anywhere, what sets Arch apart is pacman and aur. And again in the case of Manjaro and EndeavourOS these and the wiki are the main “selling points”.

            Arch is just the easiest one to start from a very minimal system and build something up that’s totally yours

            Minimal ubuntu and fedora exists as well. And if you were to customise them you’d end up with something that you like as well. But i see what you are saying and i agree.

            • @Molecular0079
              link
              English
              31 year ago

              There are several programs (such as optimus-manager for nvidia and integrated video card laptops) which are pretty much only found on the AUR

              As a person who uses Davinci Resolve, I can safely say that the AUR version is probably the easiest way to get it on a non-CentOS/RHEL distro. The AUR is still one of the biggest draws to Arch for me.

            • ZephrC
              link
              fedilink
              11 year ago

              There are certainly still a few edge cases where the AUR is the least shitty option, and if those apply to you then go for it, but my experience has always been that the more I use it, the worse my experience gets, and everything I need has had better options for a while now, and those edge cases where it even makes sense are rapidly dwindling. But yes, I was exaggerating how bad it is. There are still more than just a few uses for it. EndeavorOS is maybe okay if you want that without having to install Arch, but Manjaro messes with things enough that it’s not as compatible with the AUR as it likes to pretend to be.

              And yeah, I agree, there are lots of ways to build up your own system. You can do it with any distro if you’re determined enough, and there are other decent options besides just Arch. I just find Arch to be the easiest one to do it with, and I like easy. It’s maybe counter-intuitive to say, but I like Arch specifically because it makes the things I want to do easier than any other distro does.