It could be that they have improved on pamac allot latelly.
I have not used Manjaro for about 4 /5 months now i guess.
So maybe it has become allot better and more reliable now.
But Mathew Moore also posted a video, that he’s kinda getting annoyed with the direction that Manjaro is heading.
I think that if the Manjaro developers just do more advanced testing on the critical updates that come in from Arch, so that they hold them back a littlebit longer.
Then i think that Manjaro would be a really great distribution.
Because most of the issues are with the updates that flow in directlly from Arch.
I got the feeling that they sometimes just roll them out too quicklly without proper testing.
Not saying that this never ever happens to Ubuntu either.
That’s just Arch Period. Nothing really gets tested. It gets thrown in the stable repos a week after release.
Depends on the packages… But back then it was very noticeable with GNOME. 3.24 and 3.26 made it into stable within a week and it was broken. Cause Wayland was still iffy.
Yes i understand that its just an Arch thing.
But Manjaro in the past did hold certain critical updates back for testing.
But i have the feeling that Manjaro puts less afford in this since staff change.
i could be wrong of course.
But i guess that might be a discussion for another topic maybe.
Allthough Antergos and other Arch derivatives deal with the same potential things.
And that is Arch being Arch.
I would argue (at least if its me saying don’t arch to a beginner) is that it requires you know linux from the get-go. When installing Arch, your likely going to run into hurdles such as wifi drivers. Even Debain gave me hurdles, but Ubuntu- it just worked. I
But then one could argue it breaks you in quickly. If its a beginner “I kinda want to leave windows but don’t want problems” user, I’d say go Ubuntu, its tuned for that. If its a “i want to get up to speed on linux fast” beginner, I would recommend Arch.
Logic behind my post= I’m a beginner and I can’t Arch, even Manjaro kicks my ass trying to install it (posted from an Ubuntu laptop- bring the hate Arch users). Logic behind recommending Arch if one wanted to learn fast= IMO I’ve slacked on learning Linux because Ubuntu just works. Arch would force me to be up in their wiki (fantastic btw) to get things done- ie: don’t let me have an easy path.
I just booted 18.04 from USB to save some stuff from my laptop before I nuke it. Wanted to look at an mkv just to know what it is. Nope, ubuntu can’t h.264. Wanted to back it up on a USB stick. Nope, ubuntu can’t exfat.
It is this type of shit that pisses me off. These are just basic features that ubuntu simply won’t give you out of the box.
If something like manjaro isn’t for beginners, than ubuntu is even worse.
If you want bleeding edge, distros like arch are the thing you want. But if you want something that’s less likely to break with a newbie at the helm… maybe not so much.
A newbie is likely to break things by themselves, or wonder if they broke things themselves. The last thing you really want in that instance until they find their feet are things randomly breaking when they are just trying to keep the platform up to date.
Once you’ve got a bit of a clue on what packages depend on what, and what resources are available for help, then that’s when i’d suggest migrating to a more bleeding edge distro… if there’s reason to (more interested in getting down and dirty with it, bleeding edge hardware support, etc.).
edit:
also depends if its the only computer available or not. if you have another system or a tablet, or whatever to get internet on for assistance while you have X, your network stack or your kernel broken or whatever… go nuts.
If its your only PC… it really sucks when you break it…
Probably not so common now everybody has mobile phones, but still. reading tutorials off a phone still sucks.
I have not used Manjaro for some time. The only issues I had was stuff breaking on updates. This is the main reason I do not use it now.
I am now using Ubuntu 16.04 on my server and Mint on my second boot drive. Ive had no issues yet with either of these installs breaking.
Disclaimer, I am a Linux noob. With more time and patience, I dont think Manjaro would be too bad to fix. I like it overall, I love having AUR and pacman. May try it again in the future.
I used Antergos as my main school laptop distro for about the last year, just switched to Ubuntu due to there being so many dead or broken repositories for programs that I needed/wanted. Antergos was my first Linux distro and I really enjoyed it and learned a lot, but I really need better app support…
Edit: I personally think Arch based distros are fine for beginners Antergos was after all my first time on Linux for anything more than messing around in a VM.
The reason Ubuntu/Debian/Mint are considered beginner friendly is because the packages are tested as long as you stay in the official repositories. On Arch and other rolling release style distros, bugs and regressions can and will happen.
As a new user do a zero roll back and compiling your own betas and nightly is daunting. Also, if a bug occurs you may have to manually edit a conf file. There is also a chance you will have to select and roll you own kernel with the right modules to make certain drivers and features work.
On something like Debian or Ubuntu/Mint software and firmware is tested against the target kernel and the rest of the software.
Unless I just got cutting edge hardware I stick to stable releases. New kernel and software features and will he back ported after testeing so you just have to wait a little longer
NVIDIA for example targets certain kernels for their drivers. AMD on the proprietary side do the same thing. And sometime with open source drivers for GPUs, CPUs and storage you may even see regressions in performance.
Unless you are testing or have really new hardware I do not see rolling release worth the time. And generally only recommend using it on a VM.
Also this applies to any stable release distro not just Ubuntu/Mint/Debian. Fedora and Opensuse are good stable examples on the RPM side.
Can people make it sound more like Manjaro doesn’t have access to LTS kernels? It does, by gui. It’s even possible to install/revert/delete kernels in the gui. It’s a nice service to it’s users, which many beginner-friendly distros don’t even have.
Science freaks, that want to “understand” everything about linux (yeah, right) can install scientific linux for all i care. Just stop spewing the need to know-how about everything, everywhere.
Not every user needs or wants to know everything about linux. Knowing about LTS is not special knowledge. U know about ubuntu, well then you probably know what LTS means, as canonical advertises the LTS version at every release
Cool. I view it as a desktop. Not a toy, not a tool. A desktop with an user interface, that can fit needs over multiple systems. That can support foss and still run whatever is thrown at it. I don’t “need to know” every single little detail about linux, nor would i want to. Some users value their sanity more than others and i’ve seen enough developers in the psychiatric system. Both on and offline
(Take this with a grain of salt as I’m not too experienced - see my previous threads if you really want to)
Just to throw my unwarranted two cents,
I’m know if “wrong for beginners” is the correct term to use. I feel that it’s more appropriate to say “not for those unprepared/not ready/don’t want to dive in”
It took me two days to install arch on my laptop and get it working (installing a DE, editing mirrors, etc. But that’s a story for another time). That includes wiping the drive and starting from scratch and plenty of wiki & forum reading. Along with a few times I messed with things and prevented the system from booting requiring me to boot from USB and fix my fuck ups. It was a great feeling each time I had to do that to turn on my machine and have a functioning Arch + XFCE install. As stated, I’m willing to read wikis and forums to get things working or fix my mistakes.
But enough rambling about me, I’d say things like Arch aren’t for people who want an operating system that works “out of the box” so to speak, but for people that are willing to read and learn and ask questions regardless of skill level.
But what do I know, I’m just a beginner that’s running Arch on my laptop and willing to learn.
And of the course the (for some reason necessary) statement that this is just my opinion on the matter.
Yeah well wenn it comes to newer kernels for cutting edge hardware support.
Linux Mint exally has a really nice kernel manager tool added to the update manager.
Which makes it pretty easy to install a newer kernel wenn needed.
And if the newer kernel for whatever reason breaks the system,
you can easally bootup with the previous working kernel.
And then you can just uninstall the breaking kernel again.
Which is a really nice addition to Mint.
Ubuntu also has a tool for installing and managing kernels,
Uuku kernel manager or something its called.
But they generally dont ship with that by default.
Also the added support for snaps and flatpack, makes it easier to get newer versions of certain applications in.
Wenn it comes to Arch, if a certain application isnt in the standard repositories,
then you have to either compile it yourself or you have to get it from the AUR.
The AUR is a really nice addition to Arch, but yeah you not allways know what you get from the AUR.
I had it on multiple occasions that a AUR package saved the day when official repo stuff didn’t work well. Fancontrol was one of those lately. The official version wouldn’t start so I kicked it off the system again and grabbed the AUR one. Worked like a charm. I used the spotify version from the AUR for as long as I use Manjaro and never had a problem. Now it is in the repos.
I think we have two trains of thought here. One is based on the idea that new users should pick the most stable system so it won’t break and the other one is newbies should have as much graphical help as possible and the newest stuff available to have fun breaking it themselves. And I think this comes from two very different ideas of what a newbie is. If that newbie is mom and wants to write emails, the most stable system is probably the way to go. If the newbie is your friends kid, then it doesn’t matter how stable the system is. The little shit will break it anyway because trying stuff out is fun. I’m not a kid anymore but I am definitely of the same mindset of jumping in and breaking stuff in the process if I want to know. That is why Manjaro totally worked for me.
I tend to stress staying away until you learn to ask questions.
When you inevitably need help, most communities will point out Antergos or Manjaro isn’t Arch, and tell you you don’t know what you’re doing, rather than offer any sort of help.
Of course, even if you install pure Arch and have issues, asking for help often yields the same response.
The Arch wiki is readable and searchable for anyone and Manjaro has forums.
I mean I understand why people would prefer to ask a bigger community but the other way around you wouldn’t ask ubuntu questions on a debian forum, right?
I guess it is worth pointing out that manjaro is not using Arch repos.
So it is more than elitism from the Arch people to say that.
You have a good point about the Arch Wiki having good information. However, the language used is sometimes inefficient for technical writing. I’ve come across “should work” more than once in there. I understand they can’t test every hardware ever, but I would think they would be more receptive of questions.
Of course my experience is a few years old at this point, so maybe things have changed.
Hmmm… Maybe not
I think in the past I’ve seen Manjaro and Antergos sold as Arch with installers. Which, I think, has influenced more than a few to meander over to Arch to ask questions.
Times could be different now, maybe the comminuties have grown since I was in the Arch ish realm.
