Qusai adam
New Member
help pls which one is best to work with app Arch or manjaro
arch or manjaro which one is the pest or there is new one beater than the both ?
- Thread starter Qusai adam
- Start date
- Status
You should install Ubuntu or MInt.
OP
Qusai adam
New Member
ubuntu is all most like windows
You got a point if you really want to learn Linux you should go with Arch or Gentoo.
If you want to stay with an Arch type system try EndeavourOS.
If you want a system up and running quickly and stable install Mint.
If you want a system up and running quickly and stable install Mint.
Finally, an Answer to What is The Best Linux Distro? • Linux Tips
Finally, an attempt to answer to the age old question: Which Linux distro is the best? Read on to find out which distro is the best Linux distro.
linux-tips.us
OP
Qusai adam
New Member
thanks so much
Ubuntu is not almost like Windows, if you think that you don't know much about Linux and you should be learning the basics before jumping into something like Arch.
Question: Arch or Manjaro?
Answer: Arch.
Reason: Every non-pure Arch spin I have tried has broken eventually. EndeavourOS was the most stable, but I eventually ran into circular upgrade/downgrade dependency hell. Arch already can be a pain, but when someone other than you preconfigured it, you'll be in deep. Arch breakages are usually a trivial task to fix, so long as it's your system, not someone else's. That's actually kinda the point of Arch: to be your system tailored to your needs -- not someone else's. So Arch-spins kinda fly in the face of that. Therefore, the only purpose they serve is easy access to the AUR. Even up to 5 years back, that'd have been a valid argument. But most AUR stuff can be built from source, found in a snap/flatpak package, or downloaded as a ready-to-use Appimage.
However, the fact that you asked means you may wanna start on something that balances friendliness, reliability, and performance. That is Mint (or pure Debian stable branch if you feel bold).
That said, my first Linux was TinyCore. It was when I was first discovering open source OSes (well, Linux and BSDs at any rate). So, for some folk, a more "tinker-ish" first Linux may be desirable if, like me, you want to challenge yourself (my first challenge was obtain the 5 second boot time that was considered elite back then -- and spoiler: I succeeded).
But, yeah, there's no "best" Linux except what's best for you. That said, there are Linuxes that are "best for" specific tasks, like embedded systems, older machines, gaming, performance, user-friendliness, workflow-specific (eg: preconfigured for AV streaming/editing, preconfigured for office, preconfigured for forensics, etc.), OOTB readiness, and so on.
It's easiest to start by asking:
1. Why Linux?
2. What do I ultimately want, vs what do I want to start with, vs what are my realistic expectations?
If you can answer those questions, it's up to reading some documentation, then installing on a free bare metal system (try to avoid VMs, they have too much of a feeling of security, lol).
Answer: Arch.
Reason: Every non-pure Arch spin I have tried has broken eventually. EndeavourOS was the most stable, but I eventually ran into circular upgrade/downgrade dependency hell. Arch already can be a pain, but when someone other than you preconfigured it, you'll be in deep. Arch breakages are usually a trivial task to fix, so long as it's your system, not someone else's. That's actually kinda the point of Arch: to be your system tailored to your needs -- not someone else's. So Arch-spins kinda fly in the face of that. Therefore, the only purpose they serve is easy access to the AUR. Even up to 5 years back, that'd have been a valid argument. But most AUR stuff can be built from source, found in a snap/flatpak package, or downloaded as a ready-to-use Appimage.
However, the fact that you asked means you may wanna start on something that balances friendliness, reliability, and performance. That is Mint (or pure Debian stable branch if you feel bold).
That said, my first Linux was TinyCore. It was when I was first discovering open source OSes (well, Linux and BSDs at any rate). So, for some folk, a more "tinker-ish" first Linux may be desirable if, like me, you want to challenge yourself (my first challenge was obtain the 5 second boot time that was considered elite back then -- and spoiler: I succeeded).
But, yeah, there's no "best" Linux except what's best for you. That said, there are Linuxes that are "best for" specific tasks, like embedded systems, older machines, gaming, performance, user-friendliness, workflow-specific (eg: preconfigured for AV streaming/editing, preconfigured for office, preconfigured for forensics, etc.), OOTB readiness, and so on.
It's easiest to start by asking:
1. Why Linux?
2. What do I ultimately want, vs what do I want to start with, vs what are my realistic expectations?
If you can answer those questions, it's up to reading some documentation, then installing on a free bare metal system (try to avoid VMs, they have too much of a feeling of security, lol).
OP
Qusai adam
New Member
thanks
Ok, today is around 3 years since you posted this. But I'm seriously considering Arch. Would you still say the same thing today?
I'm getting fed up with Manjaro lately.
AlphaObeisance
Well-Known Member
Ok, today is around 3 years since you posted this. But I'm seriously considering Arch. Would you still say the same thing today?
I'm getting fed up with Manjaro lately.
Vanilla's the only way to go. Now slap it in n git goin! Idk anything about Arch Linux, I've only "dabbled"
Given the OP has not been seen for 2 years, two months, and two weeks, you may not get a reply, so I am locking this thread.
@Mike-W0BTU if you wish to pursue the idea further, by all means open a new thread in Arch & Derivatives sub-forum.
Cheers
Chris Turner
wizardfromoz
@Mike-W0BTU if you wish to pursue the idea further, by all means open a new thread in Arch & Derivatives sub-forum.
Cheers
Chris Turner
wizardfromoz
- Status
Similar threads
