Arch do argue themselves that it is the point of Arch that you configure the system yourself: https://archlinux.org/about/
Of course, one can build on top of it with different aims.
Manjaro claims to be user-friendly on their homepage, but I can’t find further philosophy/about/design decisions where they explicitly state why they changed certain things.
Manjaro, it’s like a pre-configured Arch.
Isn’t the whole point of Arch that you get to configure it yourself? /g
Arch do argue themselves that it is the point of Arch that you configure the system yourself: https://archlinux.org/about/ Of course, one can build on top of it with different aims. Manjaro claims to be user-friendly on their homepage, but I can’t find further philosophy/about/design decisions where they explicitly state why they changed certain things.
I’d argue the main point of Arch is AUR - it’s really good.
The main point of Arch is the Arch Wiki. Joke’s on them, I steal from the wiki all the time and I don’t run arch at all.
Yeah, that’s why I prefer Manjaro.
All of the benefits of rolling-release + AUR without the hassle of configuring everything myself.