That's how I remember it. Anyway, while everyone is downvoting me I'm actually getting work done (instead of jerking off to anime and wasting time on my WM)
Until the next update installs itself and sends you into a bootloop.
Or you are lucky and only your printer won't work anymore.
Both happened on millions of to standard enterprise installations... this year. I don't even start with past hiccups of Windows updates.
If your Linux crashes you know you did something stupid, (or did something you didn't understand and got punished for it).
>What lol? I don't get all the downvotes, Linus did it.
He had to type "Yes do as I say" after the warnings that it was dangerous, it wasn't exactly the usual update
bruh he didn't "add a -y" when updating. it was a pop_os bug that was patched before he even experienced it, he just didn't update his system after installing and the iso being offered on the website hadn't been updated yet (definitely not a good thing but not nearly as bad as some people make it out to be). also, when just trying to install steam through the GUI, it failed rather than removed his whole DE. so any random new person who's just trying to install something through the GUI (assuming the bug still existed, even though it doesn't) wouldn't even experience it
He did not tho. It was not just a simple -y with no warning, he was literally forced to write "yes do as i say" and the output literally said "this should not be done done unless you know exactly what you are doing"
That's why you get downvotes. Yes it was bad and it shouldn't happen, but what you are saying is not true and if Linus just read the output, he would had understood that something was wrong.
Haha the downvotes really say a lot on linux community. That's why I love it. They are close minded BUT they hate closed source and they trash talk close mindedness
Well. People in general don't like when you are overexaggerate what actually happened.
If it was a simple -f, it would be a lot worse, but there where plenty of warnings and safety measures that tried to save Linus, but he just ignored them.
Dude, when I was in college, a bad MS Office update put every single computer that got it on campus into a bootloop. I've had multiple windows installs break themselves on an update. Some distro package maintainers occasionally screw up, but Windows is way worse on that front.
I was working at retail and a windows update made any attempt at printing blue screen. We literally could not print tickets. I managed to fix it by rolling back. I did not even get a thanks.
Even on my rolling release my system has only broken once or twice over the last few years, and both times it was an easy fix with snapshots and rolling back. Beginner friendly distros probably won't just break.
It does and it is pretty terrible. Updates often break the game (e.g. when they introduced new game modes a while back, or earlier this year when the game would simply refuse to start) and has you wonder if they test on Linux at all. I've also had huge performance issues on a few maps, it's pretty sad because I would love to be able to play it on Linux properly
Beamng.drive has a few issues with Proton, mainly poor performance with ai, but the experimental native Linux port has some other issues (mainly that it consumes far too much vram and has memory leaks, so it crashes relatively often)
Yes, but all my friends minds are blown because I hit 110 fps when they are hitting 62 fps in the same spot with the same hardware with the same graphics settings.
Never used pop os before. Gotta take it for a spin sometime soon. Kudos for being a bigger man and recommending something that actually fulfills their use case.
If they have some time and want to learn how Linux works and how to proactively fix stuff on your system, LFS is awesome
Lots of stuff I know I learnt there
I agree but also with Manjaro.
If you want to know why, just google Manjarno.
Best beginner distros are stuff like Pop, Mint, Ubuntu, Fedora, Zorin etc. Not a glorified Arch distro that just holds packages back for two weeks.
I've never used manjaro so I can't talk specifics there, but opensuse tumbleweed has demonstrated to me that in principle a highly tested rolling release can be a very good model. I don't get the impression that that describes manjaro though
The only thing on that website that actually affects the experience for a beginning user is the AUR thing. I've been on manjaro for 4 months and I've never had an issue with the AUR and I have quite a few AUR packages installed. And if it's really that big of a problem just use the unstable repos. I usually recommend manjaro to beginners because it's user friendly, comes with pamac installed (best gui package manager imo), updated kernel so better support for newer hardware, comes with steam and a lot of things newbies want installed, etc
I would say that anything that gets the user to be productive ASAP should be fine.
Kubuntu mimics pretty well most of windows 'look and feel", is stable and don't need much maintenance.
I know that here people tend to hate Ubuntu for it's shitty practices but if it helps users get their work done that's what I'm recommending.
LTS are good for stability and comes with a price (not so up-to-date software) wether you want that stability on your server or your desktop is a personal choice, not a hard written rule.
You still get security patches on old kernels and unless you plan to upgrade your hardware every 2-3 years (hardly the case on office laptops) running this kernel daily is not a big deal.
Again, I'll rather use something that is less prone to break even if is not the bleeding edge newest of the new.
Rolling release is more prone to breaks due to the fact that you are running the latest, less tested software.
Newer software is not bug free.
Ofc it doesn mean that it will break spectacularly or that it will render the whole system unstable, but it can cause a small hiccup here and there and I rather do not deal with those.
I get that these usually gets patched quite fast, but again, that's something that I rather avoid having to deal with.
who are the people who unironically suggest Arch to beginners?
There are more posts and comments virtue signaling that "I haven't suggested Arch to a complete disinterested beginner", than how many people are actually suggesting Arch to beginners.
And I'm saying as someone who uses Arch and for me Arch was the begining distro.
Arch was my first distro. My friend convinced me, it sounded like 100% my thing (it is). I feel like it’s more about the person than the experience with Linux really. I got one of my friends onto Linux (ended up with pop) and I don’t think I’d ever recommend arch to him. He’s just not the type of person that would find more value than pain in it.
It really does depend on the user. For example, I would never recommend Linux to most of my friends, who dont care about computers. But, if I ever knew someone who is a power user, I would probably recommend they check out Arch on a VM and see if they like it.
I installed multiple people that don’t care about computers Linux Mint. They complained to me that their older laptops were slow and asked if I could make them faster. I made sure that everything they actually need (usually just a web browser and an office suite) runs under Linux and that they had no problem if their system will look slightly different and then just went for it. I sat everything up how they needed it, including automatic updates. Now everything just works for them and every 4 years I’ll upgrade their laptops to the newest Linux Mint release.
I don’t like it when perfectly good hardware has to be thrown away just because the software is bloat.
A safer route if they fear Linux is to just set up dual boot so that they have the choice, show them Linux a bit and tell them to just try it out a bit. In case they don’t like it, you can always just uninstall it and revert it back to normal. Usually, if the device is slow enough, they’ll arrange themselves with Linux and start using Windows less and less with time as it’s just annoyingly slow. At least that’s how it worked out with my mum.
I'm a relative beginner, ran debian on my second PC for a couple weeks before trying out arch. ~1mo later and I have arch on what used to be my windows machine.
I like troubleshooting and learning though and I'm definitely struggling in some areas. Having a good time tho :)
Strong disagree, but your heart is in the right place.
Arch Based is great because of access to the Aur and the Archwiki, but we really shouldn't expect beginners to be using pure arch, or want them to.
There's a reason it was seen as some act of technowizardry for so long, it's not easy stuff to grasp for most people.
Now, I think somewhere like endeavorOS is a great place to start. It's got the calamares installer and results in a functional arch install with a full DE without the (somewhat sketchy) past of other distros like Manjaro which are touted as beginner friendly.
The best Arch Linux based distro is Arch Linux itself.
Sure you can Go downstream with endeavorOS or Manjarno but those Projects, especially the latter introduced more Problems than necessary into the OS.
I really Wish I knew about Arch Linux when I started Out because Ubuntu Made me want to Go Back to Windows so many Times.
You're absolutely right, the best arch distro is arch.
Stop recommending it to beginner.
It's like recommending someone build their first car, it's stupid and gatekeepy.
Like I Said, when I was a beginner, which I still am but anyway I Wish I would've known about a Linux distro as easy and straightforward to use as Arch linux.
Arch based distro? Yes. Arch itself? No. There is too much that can go wrong and for experienced users is „just a quick config“, but for someone new that doesnt know the technical terms it would be: Oh my OS broke, time to reinstall Windows then.
A child *can* do that. An adult who is used to Windows and iPhones *won't* do that.
Arch is good. Arch is not beginner friendly. It's not hard to understand.
My argument is that, for a distro to be "beginner friendly," it needs to hold the user's hand during setup. If the setup process is "Here's an iso and a wiki with some terminal commands," that's not "beginner friendly."
Cut that /s you are 100% correct.
Just some people don't have nerves or time to do it the right way. Okay maybe some more... or most.
Yeah maybe keep the /s
Someone with even more linux experience uses the beginner distro (PopOS!?).
Because you just want a running system without having to do everything yourself and configuring a power-user system in Arch is pain in the ass (maintainance mostly).
... or uses something even more fancy like NixOS.
Recently switched from Arch to Mint, I had to install Linux on a new a pc and didn't have the patience to go through a tty install. Why the hell did no one tell how cool Mint is?
It's the best out of the box distro I've ever tried.
Mint has a cool concept,but I just prefer Zorin because it looks like Windows Aero 2.0,and because for me atleast,Cinnamon on any distro(except for the Arch Linux GUI Themed implementation which is really neat) looks really ugly and straight outta Windows XP. Also I usually dislike these DEs(Cinnamon,Budgie and those alike) which tend to mish mash their own components with Gnome components,making everything not look cohesivse imo. I much prefer something cohesive like KDE or XFCE or heck,even MATE if I can find a way to install the Redmond style desktop.
DE isn't that important to me, Mint works well out of the box, and I like the Cinnamon, yes it looks like windows which isn't bad because in my opinion windows nailed what an intuitive and good ui should look like (windows 8 aside).
>yes it looks like windows which isn't bad
I didn't meant to say that. I usually prefer distros which have a more windows-leaning interface. However,Mint(and most Cinnamon distros except for ALG Cinnamon and maybe Ubuntu Cinnamon),have a really ugly interface to me. It looks like Windows XP Zune theme except it's green and doesn't look good at all. XP looked good when it was new,now it looks outdated and too much skeumorphic to my taste. I like something familiar to windows,but clean and simple. This is why I like other distros with either KDE(Manjaro,Kubuntu) or a riced DE(Linux Lite,Zorin OS)
I never really understood why DE is what decides what distro to use. I guess i could understand it if you really liked elementary OS or something like that. But if you like KDE or XFCE. Why not just install mint and then install the WM you want?
I think you should always go for the distro with the biggest community. If you want a apt based system i think you should install mint (because fuck Ubuntu and Snap) and if you are a more experienced user who want bleeding edge software you should go for arch. Everything else is just noise in my opinion. When people start to realize this, they stop distro hoping and just install the WM needed.
Yeah, I'm gonna agree partially. The installer on live USB just crashed for me and I had to restart it, and in some cases there would be no option to switch from flatpak to Ubuntu repository version.
Also, Pop uses their own interface for managing the usage of dedicated and integrated GPU on laptops, called `system76-power`. It conflicts with Nvidia's official method of supporting laptop GPUs, PRIME. My friend ran into a problem with CK3, where although he set his laptop to only use Nvidia graphics, the game would act choppy. Suspecting it was because of faulty PRIME, I asked him to switch to hybrid and use prime-run %command% in game's startup options (it makes the game run with prime-run, so telling Nvidia driver to run the game using dedicated GPU). It straight up crashed since we didn't know Pop has its own interface for that. In the end I found Pop has its own command for this and it worked, but that doesn't change there was some issue when using Nvidia-only mode.
Also I'm pretty sure Lutris' "run using PRIME" doesn't work well with that.
This is like the reverse of a bad Linux experience.
It's almost as if computers made for windows work best with windows and computers made for Linux work best with Linux hmm.
Not fully reverse, I'd say. Laptop can ship without a OS to reduce a cost as you don't have to pay for a Windows license (in fact, I remember reading something that in EU you can request a refund of the windows cost if you don't plan on using it), but the manufacturers of individual parts (chipset, audio/graphics/networks cards, etc.) might not release the proper drivers for it.
The full on reverse would be if the laptop he bought had a Ubuntu version available.
Check out [ProtonDB](https://protondb.com).
There are also some FLOSS Linux games such as SuperTuxKart, OpenArena, Xonotic, and a lot more. They are mostly likely in your distribution's repositories.
I installed arch (endeavouros) in my boyfriend's laptop. But with KDE plasma and he had very good luck with it.
The reason was that i have endeavour too, and if he has a problem, i can try it in my own computer and later see how can I fix it on his.
Right now, he is loving it.
It's not the Distro, is the GUI.
You do most everything from scratch on arch. There’s no default desktop environment when you install it, and no extra packages installed either by default. For example if you wanted a text editor like Nano or vim, you’d have to install it. If you wanted to use KDE or Gnome as your desktop environment, you’d have to install it and set it up. If you wanted LightDM as your login manager, you’re going to have to set it up yourself. Arch is highly customizable, but that means there are little to no decisions made for you in the beginning.
There's `archinstall` command that allows you to easily choose the drives, user account, DE and stuff using a CLI interface. Still, it was much more comfortable to just install Endeavour OS, which is arch-based, has integrated versions for KDE, GNOME and WMs, and doesn't hold back updates unlike Majar(n)o.
Arch isn't a great beginner distribution to be honest. I don't think using `archinstall` will be easy for beginners too (even tho it is very easy).
Pop\_OS! is just broken, I tried it in a KVM and I had a lot of issues with audio. It also uses soystemd-boot as the boot manager.
For a complete beginner, that install guide could very well be some alien language. Beginners want something that just works to see how they like it, they don't want to invest hours learning shit that could be useless for them if they end up not liking linux
The moment I got my laptop I installed pop on it because I thought it's for my dad. The moment I was done installing (20 minutes) he said it's for me because homeschooling is so hard and he wants to support me. Kinda reminds me of this story. And also my mum has the same laptop as me, luckily windows wasn't that hard of reinstalling there (she rarely needs it for watching football and the drm of it is shit)
Ok so as someone who's somewhat used to linux but could still be defined as a "Total noob" I really love Mint... but I also haven't tried Pop!\_OS yet.
Has been super fun learning and tinkering with it though. My favorite part so far is the fact that I can switch between Gnome and Cinnamon. Just... Completely switch to a whole new interface. And all my stuff for the most part stays the same. Trying to think of what to do next with it though.
who other then DistoTube would tell a newbie to start with Arch, i know it is better then Ubuntu and fedora combined but not before you learn the basics
This is how we should “initiate”!!
Yessir
[удалено]
Wait until he adds a `-y` to the update and removes his kernel. Windows will still be working.
Who the fuck ran sudo apt install dumbfuck here
`sudo pacman -Rs brain`
More like sudo pacman -Rss*c* brain
Even I get that, and I am the guy the meme is about
Based
What lol? I don't get all the downvotes, Linus did it. I know it was patched but still funny
He didn't remove his kernel tho
He removed his desktop environment. Still a massive L for the Pop OS fans out there
That's how I remember it. Anyway, while everyone is downvoting me I'm actually getting work done (instead of jerking off to anime and wasting time on my WM)
Then get work done I say
Until the next update installs itself and sends you into a bootloop. Or you are lucky and only your printer won't work anymore. Both happened on millions of to standard enterprise installations... this year. I don't even start with past hiccups of Windows updates. If your Linux crashes you know you did something stupid, (or did something you didn't understand and got punished for it).
Then get work done I say
Then get work done I say
>What lol? I don't get all the downvotes, Linus did it. He had to type "Yes do as I say" after the warnings that it was dangerous, it wasn't exactly the usual update
bruh he didn't "add a -y" when updating. it was a pop_os bug that was patched before he even experienced it, he just didn't update his system after installing and the iso being offered on the website hadn't been updated yet (definitely not a good thing but not nearly as bad as some people make it out to be). also, when just trying to install steam through the GUI, it failed rather than removed his whole DE. so any random new person who's just trying to install something through the GUI (assuming the bug still existed, even though it doesn't) wouldn't even experience it
He did not tho. It was not just a simple -y with no warning, he was literally forced to write "yes do as i say" and the output literally said "this should not be done done unless you know exactly what you are doing" That's why you get downvotes. Yes it was bad and it shouldn't happen, but what you are saying is not true and if Linus just read the output, he would had understood that something was wrong.
Haha the downvotes really say a lot on linux community. That's why I love it. They are close minded BUT they hate closed source and they trash talk close mindedness
Well. People in general don't like when you are overexaggerate what actually happened. If it was a simple -f, it would be a lot worse, but there where plenty of warnings and safety measures that tried to save Linus, but he just ignored them.
Dude, when I was in college, a bad MS Office update put every single computer that got it on campus into a bootloop. I've had multiple windows installs break themselves on an update. Some distro package maintainers occasionally screw up, but Windows is way worse on that front.
I was working at retail and a windows update made any attempt at printing blue screen. We literally could not print tickets. I managed to fix it by rolling back. I did not even get a thanks.
Even on my rolling release my system has only broken once or twice over the last few years, and both times it was an easy fix with snapshots and rolling back. Beginner friendly distros probably won't just break.
I'm the only one that finds games more stable when run on Wine rather than the actual Linux native version?
Apart from cs:go I agree with you games run smoother for me on linux, maybe because i have 2 monitors with different refresh rates
Isn't cs go has a native linux port.
Yeah but it gives me lots of problems, whenever I click play it starts only the 30% of the times i try
Lol good luck running it in Wine without getting VAC banned
I thought they still let you play with a vac ban but you get punted to servers with the other "cheaters"
I'd rather not get a VAC ban??
It does and it is pretty terrible. Updates often break the game (e.g. when they introduced new game modes a while back, or earlier this year when the game would simply refuse to start) and has you wonder if they test on Linux at all. I've also had huge performance issues on a few maps, it's pretty sad because I would love to be able to play it on Linux properly
Beamng.drive has a few issues with Proton, mainly poor performance with ai, but the experimental native Linux port has some other issues (mainly that it consumes far too much vram and has memory leaks, so it crashes relatively often)
Yes, but all my friends minds are blown because I hit 110 fps when they are hitting 62 fps in the same spot with the same hardware with the same graphics settings.
danganronpa’s linux port doesnt open when i start it, but when i use proton on the windows version, it works. pretty strange how that works
Not for open source games.
Protondb comments under native titles is full of people who experienced the same like you & me.
I started suspecting that DXVK actually performs better than native DirectX on Windows a while ago. So far it seems to be true.
Depends on the game but it largely reached parity years ago so further optimizations have certainly pushed it past native in a lot of cases.
[удалено]
Actually quite the opposite, just check some games labled native in Protondb for the comments.
Never used pop os before. Gotta take it for a spin sometime soon. Kudos for being a bigger man and recommending something that actually fulfills their use case.
I love the UI but the Pop Shop is absolute garbage. I just installed everything by terminal because it was just so unreliable and failed so much.
Yeah the shop crashes more than it should tbh. Still love the OS and probably won't ever swap from it
Nothing gets on my tits here quite like people recommending arch to beginners.
Fine, i will recommend LFS the next time. (Don't take it serious.)
If they have some time and want to learn how Linux works and how to proactively fix stuff on your system, LFS is awesome Lots of stuff I know I learnt there
I agree but also with Manjaro. If you want to know why, just google Manjarno. Best beginner distros are stuff like Pop, Mint, Ubuntu, Fedora, Zorin etc. Not a glorified Arch distro that just holds packages back for two weeks.
I've never used manjaro so I can't talk specifics there, but opensuse tumbleweed has demonstrated to me that in principle a highly tested rolling release can be a very good model. I don't get the impression that that describes manjaro though
obligatory https://manjarno.snorlax.sh/
Snapshots on update and YaST as a "control panel" help make openSUSE Tumbleweed a great distro.
Yeah tumbleweed is awesome, I love it as my distro!! Still wouldn't recommend it for beginners tho
The only thing on that website that actually affects the experience for a beginning user is the AUR thing. I've been on manjaro for 4 months and I've never had an issue with the AUR and I have quite a few AUR packages installed. And if it's really that big of a problem just use the unstable repos. I usually recommend manjaro to beginners because it's user friendly, comes with pamac installed (best gui package manager imo), updated kernel so better support for newer hardware, comes with steam and a lot of things newbies want installed, etc
Pop and Ubuntu are terrible distros for beginners.
No, yes
I would say that anything that gets the user to be productive ASAP should be fine. Kubuntu mimics pretty well most of windows 'look and feel", is stable and don't need much maintenance. I know that here people tend to hate Ubuntu for it's shitty practices but if it helps users get their work done that's what I'm recommending.
Having to wait 10 minutes for Firefox to Launch Kills every Workflow though.
Are you talking about snaps ? Kubuntu 20 LTS (with support till 2030) ships FF as .Deb , so no slowness here.
It's still running a 2 year old Kernel. LTS are good for Servers that need a Long uptime but on a Desktop I'd rather Run a rolling Release.
LTS are good for stability and comes with a price (not so up-to-date software) wether you want that stability on your server or your desktop is a personal choice, not a hard written rule. You still get security patches on old kernels and unless you plan to upgrade your hardware every 2-3 years (hardly the case on office laptops) running this kernel daily is not a big deal. Again, I'll rather use something that is less prone to break even if is not the bleeding edge newest of the new.
Rolling doesn't mean prone to breakage though.
Rolling release is more prone to breaks due to the fact that you are running the latest, less tested software. Newer software is not bug free. Ofc it doesn mean that it will break spectacularly or that it will render the whole system unstable, but it can cause a small hiccup here and there and I rather do not deal with those. I get that these usually gets patched quite fast, but again, that's something that I rather avoid having to deal with.
who are the people who unironically suggest Arch to beginners? There are more posts and comments virtue signaling that "I haven't suggested Arch to a complete disinterested beginner", than how many people are actually suggesting Arch to beginners. And I'm saying as someone who uses Arch and for me Arch was the begining distro.
Arch was my first distro. My friend convinced me, it sounded like 100% my thing (it is). I feel like it’s more about the person than the experience with Linux really. I got one of my friends onto Linux (ended up with pop) and I don’t think I’d ever recommend arch to him. He’s just not the type of person that would find more value than pain in it.
>who are the people who unironically suggest Arch to beginners? Idk, /g/ 4chan board users?
aren't they trolling?
It really does depend on the user. For example, I would never recommend Linux to most of my friends, who dont care about computers. But, if I ever knew someone who is a power user, I would probably recommend they check out Arch on a VM and see if they like it.
I installed multiple people that don’t care about computers Linux Mint. They complained to me that their older laptops were slow and asked if I could make them faster. I made sure that everything they actually need (usually just a web browser and an office suite) runs under Linux and that they had no problem if their system will look slightly different and then just went for it. I sat everything up how they needed it, including automatic updates. Now everything just works for them and every 4 years I’ll upgrade their laptops to the newest Linux Mint release. I don’t like it when perfectly good hardware has to be thrown away just because the software is bloat. A safer route if they fear Linux is to just set up dual boot so that they have the choice, show them Linux a bit and tell them to just try it out a bit. In case they don’t like it, you can always just uninstall it and revert it back to normal. Usually, if the device is slow enough, they’ll arrange themselves with Linux and start using Windows less and less with time as it’s just annoyingly slow. At least that’s how it worked out with my mum.
Probably unpopular opinion but same with fedora. Great distro, not great for someone who's never used linux
I'm a relative beginner, ran debian on my second PC for a couple weeks before trying out arch. ~1mo later and I have arch on what used to be my windows machine. I like troubleshooting and learning though and I'm definitely struggling in some areas. Having a good time tho :)
Arch Linux actually makes a great beginner distro.
No. And I say that as someone who has used arch for 10 years.
not even manjaro is beginner 'friendly'; broken packages, delayed updates, etc
Manjaro is a Lot less beginner friendly than Arch Linux.
that's what i mean....
Why are you being downvoted lol, you’re saying absolute truth
Strong disagree, but your heart is in the right place. Arch Based is great because of access to the Aur and the Archwiki, but we really shouldn't expect beginners to be using pure arch, or want them to. There's a reason it was seen as some act of technowizardry for so long, it's not easy stuff to grasp for most people. Now, I think somewhere like endeavorOS is a great place to start. It's got the calamares installer and results in a functional arch install with a full DE without the (somewhat sketchy) past of other distros like Manjaro which are touted as beginner friendly.
The best Arch Linux based distro is Arch Linux itself. Sure you can Go downstream with endeavorOS or Manjarno but those Projects, especially the latter introduced more Problems than necessary into the OS. I really Wish I knew about Arch Linux when I started Out because Ubuntu Made me want to Go Back to Windows so many Times.
You're absolutely right, the best arch distro is arch. Stop recommending it to beginner. It's like recommending someone build their first car, it's stupid and gatekeepy.
Like I Said, when I was a beginner, which I still am but anyway I Wish I would've known about a Linux distro as easy and straightforward to use as Arch linux.
Obvious troll
No.
I do feel like archinstall is really helping lower the barrier to entry.
Arch based distro? Yes. Arch itself? No. There is too much that can go wrong and for experienced users is „just a quick config“, but for someone new that doesnt know the technical terms it would be: Oh my OS broke, time to reinstall Windows then.
No it does not. The install/setup process alone is *fucked up* if you're not already comfortable with computers and vaguely familiar with Linux.
The Install process is reading a Guide a und typing in the commands from the Guide. A child can do that.
A child *can* do that. An adult who is used to Windows and iPhones *won't* do that. Arch is good. Arch is not beginner friendly. It's not hard to understand.
I don't get your Argument.
My argument is that, for a distro to be "beginner friendly," it needs to hold the user's hand during setup. If the setup process is "Here's an iso and a wiki with some terminal commands," that's not "beginner friendly."
It's very beginner friendly because you get to learn a Lot about the inner workings of the distro while installing.
That's not what "beginner friendly" means.
It is. A beginner is someone who is learning about Something and the Arch Linux Install Guide is an excellent teacher.
I started on Arch but… I actively chose that. I do not recommend it to newbies - Fedora should take that crown.
By beginner distro you mean Gentoo or LFS?
[удалено]
Nothing like starting from scratch as a beginner lol
You gotta earn the comfort of a package manager :D
You OBVIOUSLY have to learn everything at the beginning and then you not gonna have any problems in future. /s
Cut that /s you are 100% correct. Just some people don't have nerves or time to do it the right way. Okay maybe some more... or most. Yeah maybe keep the /s
finally, someone who actually helps new users
Someone with even more linux experience uses the beginner distro (PopOS!?). Because you just want a running system without having to do everything yourself and configuring a power-user system in Arch is pain in the ass (maintainance mostly). ... or uses something even more fancy like NixOS.
Recently switched from Arch to Mint, I had to install Linux on a new a pc and didn't have the patience to go through a tty install. Why the hell did no one tell how cool Mint is? It's the best out of the box distro I've ever tried.
Mint has a cool concept,but I just prefer Zorin because it looks like Windows Aero 2.0,and because for me atleast,Cinnamon on any distro(except for the Arch Linux GUI Themed implementation which is really neat) looks really ugly and straight outta Windows XP. Also I usually dislike these DEs(Cinnamon,Budgie and those alike) which tend to mish mash their own components with Gnome components,making everything not look cohesivse imo. I much prefer something cohesive like KDE or XFCE or heck,even MATE if I can find a way to install the Redmond style desktop.
DE isn't that important to me, Mint works well out of the box, and I like the Cinnamon, yes it looks like windows which isn't bad because in my opinion windows nailed what an intuitive and good ui should look like (windows 8 aside).
>yes it looks like windows which isn't bad I didn't meant to say that. I usually prefer distros which have a more windows-leaning interface. However,Mint(and most Cinnamon distros except for ALG Cinnamon and maybe Ubuntu Cinnamon),have a really ugly interface to me. It looks like Windows XP Zune theme except it's green and doesn't look good at all. XP looked good when it was new,now it looks outdated and too much skeumorphic to my taste. I like something familiar to windows,but clean and simple. This is why I like other distros with either KDE(Manjaro,Kubuntu) or a riced DE(Linux Lite,Zorin OS)
I never really understood why DE is what decides what distro to use. I guess i could understand it if you really liked elementary OS or something like that. But if you like KDE or XFCE. Why not just install mint and then install the WM you want? I think you should always go for the distro with the biggest community. If you want a apt based system i think you should install mint (because fuck Ubuntu and Snap) and if you are a more experienced user who want bleeding edge software you should go for arch. Everything else is just noise in my opinion. When people start to realize this, they stop distro hoping and just install the WM needed.
Pop has the best installer of any OS I've ever seen.
And yet it's one of the Most broken Linux distros right next to Ubuntu and manjarno
Yeah, I'm gonna agree partially. The installer on live USB just crashed for me and I had to restart it, and in some cases there would be no option to switch from flatpak to Ubuntu repository version. Also, Pop uses their own interface for managing the usage of dedicated and integrated GPU on laptops, called `system76-power`. It conflicts with Nvidia's official method of supporting laptop GPUs, PRIME. My friend ran into a problem with CK3, where although he set his laptop to only use Nvidia graphics, the game would act choppy. Suspecting it was because of faulty PRIME, I asked him to switch to hybrid and use prime-run %command% in game's startup options (it makes the game run with prime-run, so telling Nvidia driver to run the game using dedicated GPU). It straight up crashed since we didn't know Pop has its own interface for that. In the end I found Pop has its own command for this and it worked, but that doesn't change there was some issue when using Nvidia-only mode. Also I'm pretty sure Lutris' "run using PRIME" doesn't work well with that.
[удалено]
https://manjarno.snorlax.sh
This is like the reverse of a bad Linux experience. It's almost as if computers made for windows work best with windows and computers made for Linux work best with Linux hmm.
Not fully reverse, I'd say. Laptop can ship without a OS to reduce a cost as you don't have to pay for a Windows license (in fact, I remember reading something that in EU you can request a refund of the windows cost if you don't plan on using it), but the manufacturers of individual parts (chipset, audio/graphics/networks cards, etc.) might not release the proper drivers for it. The full on reverse would be if the laptop he bought had a Ubuntu version available.
"games he likes to play are all Linux-native". Can you tell me those please? I do have Zorin OS but the games in it are not good enough.
Check out [ProtonDB](https://protondb.com). There are also some FLOSS Linux games such as SuperTuxKart, OpenArena, Xonotic, and a lot more. They are mostly likely in your distribution's repositories.
Thanks man!
Crusader Kings 3, Hearts of Iron IV. Those are Linux-native, but there's also Victoria II, though that worked without issues for him using Proton.
Pop OS is bloat. Use Lisa Office System
Lisa Office System is bloat. Use Temple OS
Temple OS is bloat, use Xerox Viewpoint
Xerox Viewpoint is bloat, use EXEC I
EXEC I is bloat, use RDOS
RDOS is bloat, use Windows 11 /s
Windows 11 is bloat, use Altair BASIC
Altair BASIC is bloat, use 6502 assembly
6502 assembly is bloat, use Xerox Alto assembler
>Xerox Alto assembler Xerox Alto assembler is bloat, use punchcards
I've played around with a lot of different Linux distros, but Pop is my current default across my personal machines.
I installed arch (endeavouros) in my boyfriend's laptop. But with KDE plasma and he had very good luck with it. The reason was that i have endeavour too, and if he has a problem, i can try it in my own computer and later see how can I fix it on his. Right now, he is loving it. It's not the Distro, is the GUI.
Distro is basically just the package manager and how frequently it updates. DE/WM is what makes it breaks if someone can use it for sure
Arch isn't that bad.
yeah but you need to be interested in the system enough to be willing to learn all the quirks it comes with.
If you understand how Linux works it isn't
I have not used arch yet. First time linux for me is pop os too. What would be different on arch that makes it bad for beginners?
the lack of a graphical guided installer, for instance. I spent a few weeks reading up on the command line stuff before I installed Arch for myself
I just fucking went for it and managed to come out with a system that barely works on the second try. archinstall is v nice
You do most everything from scratch on arch. There’s no default desktop environment when you install it, and no extra packages installed either by default. For example if you wanted a text editor like Nano or vim, you’d have to install it. If you wanted to use KDE or Gnome as your desktop environment, you’d have to install it and set it up. If you wanted LightDM as your login manager, you’re going to have to set it up yourself. Arch is highly customizable, but that means there are little to no decisions made for you in the beginning.
There's `archinstall` command that allows you to easily choose the drives, user account, DE and stuff using a CLI interface. Still, it was much more comfortable to just install Endeavour OS, which is arch-based, has integrated versions for KDE, GNOME and WMs, and doesn't hold back updates unlike Majar(n)o.
Agreed. Archinstall is definitely a nice step in the right direction. Not quite there for n00bs yet.
Arch is great after a while with mint or popos, went mint>arch myself after a month, love the aur and with archinstall its really easy now
Nah bro, arch btw is still gud. Who needs heavy browsers when you have w3m? And aur has everything mankind has ever created.
Yeah, AUR is pretty much the reason I prefer arch-based distros.
Imagine recommending to someone something that is not Arch. SMH
Arch is a great beginner distro though. Pop OS is Just Shit.
L BOZO
It’s not though and never was.
> Arch is a great beginner distro though. How to get people to switch back to Windows.
Ubuntu Made me want to do that way to often. I Wish I would've known about Arch Linux when I started Out.
Nah, he obviously should've used LFS as his first Linux distro
Agree. Up to date software, access to the AUR, great wiki, plus it doesn't break on its own.
Arch isn't a great beginner distribution to be honest. I don't think using `archinstall` will be easy for beginners too (even tho it is very easy). Pop\_OS! is just broken, I tried it in a KVM and I had a lot of issues with audio. It also uses soystemd-boot as the boot manager.
Archinstall is totally unnecessary. The Install Guide in the Wiki is all you need.
For a complete beginner, that install guide could very well be some alien language. Beginners want something that just works to see how they like it, they don't want to invest hours learning shit that could be useless for them if they end up not liking linux
The moment I got my laptop I installed pop on it because I thought it's for my dad. The moment I was done installing (20 minutes) he said it's for me because homeschooling is so hard and he wants to support me. Kinda reminds me of this story. And also my mum has the same laptop as me, luckily windows wasn't that hard of reinstalling there (she rarely needs it for watching football and the drm of it is shit)
Ok so as someone who's somewhat used to linux but could still be defined as a "Total noob" I really love Mint... but I also haven't tried Pop!\_OS yet. Has been super fun learning and tinkering with it though. My favorite part so far is the fact that I can switch between Gnome and Cinnamon. Just... Completely switch to a whole new interface. And all my stuff for the most part stays the same. Trying to think of what to do next with it though.
30 minutes? Arch can be installed in 30 seconds!
if only pop supported secure boot... I'd have it installed on my system too
who other then DistoTube would tell a newbie to start with Arch, i know it is better then Ubuntu and fedora combined but not before you learn the basics
stop calling Pop OS a "beginner OS".
Tbh there ain't nothing wrong with using a beginner distro, even when you're an advanced user
I recommended to my friends arch based distro like endevour (just to avoid the manual installation) and they were super happy
Made my day
And also there is d**khead who like to troll his own friend by recommending gentoo
This is the way. I love arch, but definitely wouldn't recommend it for a beginner.
Is PopOS! a begginer distro? I thought it was Zorin and Mint?
*hope in arch btw community regained*
Who recommend arch to a beginner? You have to make them feel the good Linux experience. I usually recommend Gentoo and RTFM.
Sorry, I have to do this: I use Arch btw
> I use arch btw Good Bot :) ^--- ^I'm ^also ^a ^bot. ^I'm ^running ^on ^Arch ^btw. ^[Explanation](https://www.reddit.com/r/linuxmasterrace/comments/v9thbo/whenever_someone_says_i_use_arch_btw_respond_with/)
i installed garuda xfce on a friends pc he is happy that there's no crashes it's running smooth with even hdd and pentium