129
submitted 1 week ago by Sunny@slrpnk.net to c/linux@lemmy.ml

During the first impressions of said distro, what feature surprised you the most?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] lemmyvore@feddit.nl 1 points 1 week ago

First of all would be the fact that Endeavour is basically just an installer. It should have been an alternative offered by Arch alongside archinstall. I know it also offers some desktop setup but IMO that's too little to qualify as a distro. You can replicate looks and themes fairly easily. Might as well install Arch.

...but I don't want Arch because I'm at a point where I want my desktop distro to be boring and predictable, so it enables me to focus on other things. Arch needs more maintenance than I'm willing to put in. But I also want a rolling distro and having recent-enough packages.

Manjaro is a unique combination of rolling and stability. It's that combo that's the main factor but I'd be lying if I didn't say I enjoy not having to ever think about the graphics drivers, or about the kernel, and it's nice to have a graphical package manager.

As a sidenote, Garuda goes the extra mile and adds similar quality-of-life tools, while staying true to Arch repos. I think Garuda should get the publicity as an actual alternative in-between Arch and Manjaro, rather than Endeavour.

[-] geoma@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 week ago

Ok I understand the technical reality you poin to, I just refer to the user experience. For a normal user, you probably won't notice that technically manjaro is not arch and EOS is. IMHO Manjaro breaks a lot and EOS just works and needs less manteinance.

[-] lemmyvore@feddit.nl 1 points 1 week ago

How long have you been using each of them? In my years-long experience it's been the exact opposite. Manjaro goes out of its way to not break anything and offers safety measures out of the box to recover if something should break. Arch doesn't care, it introduces breaking changes all the time and expects its users to be able to cope with them.

They target very different types of users and have very different goals. Manjaro explicitly tries to be stable and user-friendly whereas Arch exclusively caters to advanced users and aims to be customizable above all.

You can achieve the same with Arch that you get out of the box with Manjaro but it's not there by default – because that's not something a lot of Arch users are seeking.

For a normal user, you probably won't notice that technically manjaro is not arch and EOS is.

What's a "normal" user? On Linux you get all sorts. But you will most definitely notice a difference between daily driving Manjaro vs driving Arch.

[-] geoma@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 week ago

I used manjaro for 3 years or so and then been using EOS for similar time. Manjaro broke a lot of times. EOS is more stable for me.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
this post was submitted on 09 Sep 2024
129 points (96.4% liked)

Linux

47347 readers
1364 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS