• 10 Posts
  • 173 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 22nd, 2023

help-circle







  • that’s because you can’t have both. It’ arch or it’s very stable. Granted Arch by itself is not that unstable if you manage it well and know what you’re doing but we’re talking hardly ever having to troubleshoot something.

    Manjaro doesn’t acieve any more stability than Arch, and in fact is actually worse than arch.

    Debian testing is a rolling.

    Manjaro is an arch derivative and has the bad parts of arch still. Again, why recommend manjaro when you have better alternatives that actually achieve what manjaro sets itself out to be? Fedora had KDE plasma 6 sooner than Manjaro afaik and it managed to be stable, it is a semi-rolling with up to date yet stable packages etc, same for OpenSUSE Tumbleweed. Manjaro has no purpose, it’s half-assed at being arch and it’s half-assed at being stable.

    AUR isn’t a problem in Manjaro because of lack of support, it’s a problem because packages there are made with Arch and 99.999% of its derivatives in mind, aka latest packages not one week old still-broken packages. Also Manjaro literally accidentally DDoSes the AUR every now and then because again they’re incompetent.

    And if you’re going to be using Flatpaks then all the more reason to not bother using Manjaro or any arch derivative and just use an actually stable distro with flatpaks.



  • to be honest it’s actually not that hard depending on what you do with your PC. If you want something you can set up once and forget about NixOS is perfect, put auto-updates and the stable channel and you will be able to forget about it for months, only having to occasionally edit your config file to switch to a new release. In fact I’d argue that if they manage to get a GUI package manager, and auto-update + auto-clean setup on installation, they’d probably be one of the best noob-friendly distros out there even.

    The issue is that they sometimes tend to do big changes to how things are handled, documentation is sorely lacking and if you’re a tinkerer (especially if you like ricing) you may have a harder time than regular distros. That said the convenience of having a list of all the programs you use in a single file is amazing and I hope every package manager adopts a similar declarative way of installing software.



  • or you could use a distro made by competent people and that actually serves the purpose Manjaro claims to have.

    You really shouldn’t go for Arch & derivatives if you don’t want to fiddle with your system (the whole point of Arch & co) and really want stability (not that arch is that unstable tbh as long as you manage it proprely). Manjaro included. In fact especially manjaro since it manages to be less stable than Arch specifically because of their update policy. I mean why even be on Arch if you can’t use the AUR and have the latest packages?

    Aside from this and maybe a few others there isn’t really a wrong distro to choose, better alternatives would be NixOS (stable), Fedora, Debian testing and probably several other distros that you probably should avoid for being one-man projects or stuff.




  • Sorry but saying Linux users don’t like paying for things is just not true. In fact stats about gaming from Humble Bundle (I think, don’t remember exactly) demonstrates the opposite: that Linux users will happily pay and on average more than windows users.

    As for paying maintainers of important packages etc I think states (and corpos) should start doing it given how much of the IT infrastructure depends on them.





  • Terminals are only limited in tasks that require graphics content, what a shocker.

    For all other cases they’re vastly more powerful than any GUI can be, because no developer can (or should, it’s unrealistic to ask them to do this) match the amount of complex operations terminal commands can reach with one string or script. With GUIs you also have to deal with different sets and toolkits, like GTK, Qt, etc etc.

    There’s use-cases where GUIs work better and cases where terminals work better and which ones belong where also depends on the user, but saying terminals are more limited than GUIs and bad is flat out wrong and dishonest.


  • I think it’s the opposite, GUIs are often convoluted and rudimental compared to the power of the terminal. The terminal can be very sophsticated.

    Just because it’s how we used to do things in the past it doesn’t mean it’s archaic, quite the opposite it’s a very powerful and useful tool that no GUI can ever possibly match, in fact generally GUIs are either for noobs (and I don’t mean this in a derogatory way) and/or convenience, but you can’t really match the ease of automating, power, and freedom a terminal provides when in the hands of someone who understands what they’re doing.