Not for a newbie who wants to learn. Arch is actually not difficult at all, just time consuming. If you do a manual install, you have to read about every step and make choices.
Thats how you learn your system. After install, you know exactly what files you modified and where they are if you want to make further changes.
I think it’s a beautiful system. Its not for people who just want a windows replacement though. It’s for people who wants to know their system.
People don’t realize the power that comes from actually knowing how your system works. It’s the same as learning any skill. It gives a feeling of confidence and comfort.
I just bought a laptop with windows 11 on it and I’m currently working my way through installing arch. I’ve been using Bazzite for a while on my desktop now but I still don’t really understand a lot of the systems so I’m wanting to really dig in to it and understand why things are installed and where they are and stuff.
No I didn’t mean it that way. Ok, I’ll put it in other words. Certain people have an interest in specific things. I am interested in how Linux works, but I dont care how my car works, or how politics works. It’s just a personal instinct what we like.
And I meant that for people with my interest, arch is great. Its absolutely wrong for more than 99% of humans. But some likes it.
Humanity actually needs an easy to use open operating system.
Humanity already has Linux, and it’s taken over pretty much every computing sector.
Does it have to be “easy”? I think that’s a matter for the desktop interfaces and whoever is choosing to support them, not Linux itself.
An OS is serious business and requires a certain level of savvy from its contributors. And conversely people who are not contributors should not shape its development.
Besides, people who aren’t computer-savvy aren’t going to turn savvy just because of an easy installer. If you cater to the lowest common denominator you’d just be dragging the whole thing down.
If you don’t care about desktop adoption and the synergy effect on the overall desktop software, then no, it doesn’t have to be easy lol. All right then, keep your secrets.
I do think certain “elitist” attitudes bleed into the technical decision making. Programmers tend to see the beauty in the system architecture and it becomes it’s own value.
Be that as it may, FOSS tends to be a meritocracy and it takes some skill to contribute to it. Contributors are driven by seeking solutions to their own problems. There’s no incentive to cater to any particular user demographic. There’s a big gap between those programmers in their ivory towers and any practical application.
That gap is filled by commercial interests. And in this particular market, the PC desktop, there’s a company called Microsoft with huge resources and a vested interest in not allowing any competition. For 20 years now nobody has managed to break their stranglehold on the PC desktop. Companies like Apple and Google managed to bypass the problem by creating completely new, alternative platforms.
The elitism of a handful of nerds is the least of the issues preventing Linux on the desktop.
Yes it’s worth it many times over. I learned Linux on arch like 15 years ago. :) Its been paying off enormously during my career and private hobby life. Last windows I ran at home was windows 7.
Depends on the newbie, if the person has some terminal experience it’s ok. If it’s an ipad kid, it’s going to be tough, there’s a lot of new abstraction to understand at every step.
It’s not just ipad kids. Those who just want to work and not mess with the system are better off with Mint or Zorin. If you have to google how to install VLC then an OS has already lost for productivity.
And ironically, AI fixes almost all these problems. Just pull up Deep Seek, drop in whatever the console throws at you and you can get back the answer free of charge. These days the hardest part of bash is remembering that Ctrl+V should be Shift+Ctrl+V.
Installing Mint on my laptop actually fixed a longstanding issue with the speakers. They were working fine for ages on Wibdows, then some reason they just stopped working. Windows could not detect any speakers. It was to a point that I assumed hardware failure, and opened the laptop and traced the audio output to identify a blown sm cap or something, then gave up. It wasn’t until I installed Mint and it made a startup noise that I was like “wtf” because I thought it would never speak again. Turns out windows was just borked.
Installing Zorin on an old thinkcentre desktop just worked perfectly, despite my deep suspicion. I got it set up to meet my workflow perfectly in less time than I would have spent reinstalling windows and getting it dialed in just the way I like.
Is Arch “better”? Maybe, to some people. Could I make it work? It’s possible? Instead of tweaking arch to meet my requirements, could I rather spend my free time gardening or patting the cat? Absolutely.
Depends what kind of newbie. To the right kind of nerd a well-organized technical installer is not a deterrent, on the contrary.
I don’t think people realise that most Linux distros had arcane install processes not unlike Arch until around 2000, when a few of them started introducing simplified graphical installers (Corel, Caldera and Red Hat’s Anaconda I think were most popular). Debian for instance only switched to graphical in 2006 with Etch beta 3 (although tbf they did have a text-mode UI before that).
Nah. Arch is not noob friendly per se but with CachyOS installing and getting most of what you need to run is very easy. Experience with Steam and Proton is painless. Things can get harder when you are starting to dig deeper.
I know this is satire but Arch is like the worst distro for a newbie…
Not for a newbie who wants to learn. Arch is actually not difficult at all, just time consuming. If you do a manual install, you have to read about every step and make choices.
Thats how you learn your system. After install, you know exactly what files you modified and where they are if you want to make further changes.
I think it’s a beautiful system. Its not for people who just want a windows replacement though. It’s for people who wants to know their system.
People don’t realize the power that comes from actually knowing how your system works. It’s the same as learning any skill. It gives a feeling of confidence and comfort.
I just bought a laptop with windows 11 on it and I’m currently working my way through installing arch. I’ve been using Bazzite for a while on my desktop now but I still don’t really understand a lot of the systems so I’m wanting to really dig in to it and understand why things are installed and where they are and stuff.
It’s so much fun. Arch wiki is amazing.
Yeah but that is an issue. It’s perfectly legitimate to want stuff to just work and get to what I want to do.
You kinda implying I have a character defect for “not wanting to learn” lol. Humanity actually needs an easy to use open operating system.
Also I assume most of the reasons for why an OS does the things they way it does is tech debt lol.
No I didn’t mean it that way. Ok, I’ll put it in other words. Certain people have an interest in specific things. I am interested in how Linux works, but I dont care how my car works, or how politics works. It’s just a personal instinct what we like.
And I meant that for people with my interest, arch is great. Its absolutely wrong for more than 99% of humans. But some likes it.
Humanity already has Linux, and it’s taken over pretty much every computing sector.
Does it have to be “easy”? I think that’s a matter for the desktop interfaces and whoever is choosing to support them, not Linux itself.
An OS is serious business and requires a certain level of savvy from its contributors. And conversely people who are not contributors should not shape its development.
Besides, people who aren’t computer-savvy aren’t going to turn savvy just because of an easy installer. If you cater to the lowest common denominator you’d just be dragging the whole thing down.
If you don’t care about desktop adoption and the synergy effect on the overall desktop software, then no, it doesn’t have to be easy lol. All right then, keep your secrets.
I do think certain “elitist” attitudes bleed into the technical decision making. Programmers tend to see the beauty in the system architecture and it becomes it’s own value.
Be that as it may, FOSS tends to be a meritocracy and it takes some skill to contribute to it. Contributors are driven by seeking solutions to their own problems. There’s no incentive to cater to any particular user demographic. There’s a big gap between those programmers in their ivory towers and any practical application.
That gap is filled by commercial interests. And in this particular market, the PC desktop, there’s a company called Microsoft with huge resources and a vested interest in not allowing any competition. For 20 years now nobody has managed to break their stranglehold on the PC desktop. Companies like Apple and Google managed to bypass the problem by creating completely new, alternative platforms.
The elitism of a handful of nerds is the least of the issues preventing Linux on the desktop.
Yes and architects tends to see beauty in buildings, gardeners in gardens, chefs in cooking.
It depends.
in-VM test drive? By all means, yes. Have fun
as main OS? Detecting multiple leviathan class lifeforms in the region. Are you certain whatever you’re doing is worth it?
Yes it’s worth it many times over. I learned Linux on arch like 15 years ago. :) Its been paying off enormously during my career and private hobby life. Last windows I ran at home was windows 7.
Glad to know. Still, it’s not something I’d recommend to someone who hasn’t tried Linux before.
No I agree, unless they are interested in learning.
Literally 1984 (sorry, had to)
I’ve gotten this comment 10 times over the last year or so. :)
Depends on the newbie, if the person has some terminal experience it’s ok. If it’s an ipad kid, it’s going to be tough, there’s a lot of new abstraction to understand at every step.
It’s not just ipad kids. Those who just want to work and not mess with the system are better off with Mint or Zorin. If you have to google how to install VLC then an OS has already lost for productivity.
But that’s how you learn though, and the ability to know how to type shit in a box is a good skill to have if you have a computer.
And ironically, AI fixes almost all these problems. Just pull up Deep Seek, drop in whatever the console throws at you and you can get back the answer free of charge. These days the hardest part of bash is remembering that Ctrl+V should be Shift+Ctrl+V.
Don’t, under any circumstances, do that. This is an anti-advice.
Mint and Zorin have been flawless for me.
Installing Mint on my laptop actually fixed a longstanding issue with the speakers. They were working fine for ages on Wibdows, then some reason they just stopped working. Windows could not detect any speakers. It was to a point that I assumed hardware failure, and opened the laptop and traced the audio output to identify a blown sm cap or something, then gave up. It wasn’t until I installed Mint and it made a startup noise that I was like “wtf” because I thought it would never speak again. Turns out windows was just borked.
Installing Zorin on an old thinkcentre desktop just worked perfectly, despite my deep suspicion. I got it set up to meet my workflow perfectly in less time than I would have spent reinstalling windows and getting it dialed in just the way I like.
Is Arch “better”? Maybe, to some people. Could I make it work? It’s possible? Instead of tweaking arch to meet my requirements, could I rather spend my free time gardening or patting the cat? Absolutely.
Depends what kind of newbie. To the right kind of nerd a well-organized technical installer is not a deterrent, on the contrary.
I don’t think people realise that most Linux distros had arcane install processes not unlike Arch until around 2000, when a few of them started introducing simplified graphical installers (Corel, Caldera and Red Hat’s Anaconda I think were most popular). Debian for instance only switched to graphical in 2006 with Etch beta 3 (although tbf they did have a text-mode UI before that).
Worse than NixOS?
Nah. Arch is not noob friendly per se but with CachyOS installing and getting most of what you need to run is very easy. Experience with Steam and Proton is painless. Things can get harder when you are starting to dig deeper.
My experience with Nixos was 90% editing config files, 10% trying to play any game and failing.
deleted by creator