A lot of arch users are kids fucking with thinkpads ricing up their systems and putting anime wallppapers while not doing anything serious.
Ubuntu is commonly used by researchers and hardware developers who don’t really care about distro as long as it’s linux. The amount of times I saw people use the entire distro with default gnome skin just to launch a terminal to run their black hole simulation, the crypto cracker or some centrifuge control script… I myself am neither but ubuntu has been my go to as well since I usually don’t have time to screw with archinstall, so I just use ubuntu as good starting point and then tweak the internals as I go.
Hmm. They have some surprisingly good documentation and user forums for a bunch of kids just fooling around. Very much unlike Ubuntu. I’ve learned years ago that Arch has good HOWTOs and solutions to common Linux problems that you won’t easily find elsewhere, while you better avoid Ubuntu’s forums unless you want to pick the one correct answer out of hundreds of posts guessing blindly at trivial questions. I have been using Debian for 25 years, so I don’t have a horse in that race, it’s just what I noticed.
I feel like I’m the odd person out, using Arch like most people use Windows. I play games, do taxes, shop online, and do very minimal customizing, mostly just in KDE settings.
It’s a shockingly stable system for how “bleeding edge” it is.
No you’re supposed to rice the hell out of your Arch install, put an anime girl wallpaper, some form of neofetch replacement (RIP), and post screenshots about it while wearing programmer socks and loudly telling people how good arch is and how much their distro sucks.
Then complain about how you broke it and can’t fix it because you used archinstall thereby skipping the setup and recovery lessons, and didn’t read the wiki before updating.
How do you even measure that? If you add a single line to some dot config you’ve changed a config. Further, a huge group of people intentionally want to be supplied configs that are minimal so they can edit them how they please.
I think it is a testament of how bloated it is. I mean, we could get 20 Linux users together, list every package we have collectively installed, and produce a new distro with all of those packages that would serve all 20 of us without needing to add anything else. But our new distro would easily be the largest available, and none of us would use everything we’ve included.
Arch, a community-driven distro that hostorically required heavy use of the terminal to even install. It presents itself as very sleek and utilitarian (hence plain black girl). Arch users tend toward enthusiasts also commonly in the anime, furry etc. fandoms. Wearers of “Programming socks” almost certainly use arch (hence rainbow girl).
Ubuntu was historically marketed as the distro for everyone. Ready out of the box, polished GUI, media codecs, marketing materials made by someone who got paid to do them (hence rainbow girl). Ubuntu these days is an exceedingly corporate distro, Canonical really wants to be Microsoft. Ubuntu is very commonly used on servers for commercial and enterprise solutions and end-user desktops are vestigial at this point (hence plain black girl).
Fortunately this is wrong. They invest quite a bit into their desktop releases. They even have a small team that tests the Steam snap alone to make sure it works.
The recent addition of triple buffering into GNOME was a contribution of an an Ubuntu engineer. And if you look at the sponsor pages of projects like KDE you will see Canonical. I think they very much care, they just don’t fold under pressure from comment sections.
Arch is hard to install, hard to configure, and hard to use, because it requires cryptic commandline knowledge at every step.
People who use Arch generally know very well what they are doing, so their system works with no issues, which they never forget to mention in every conversation.
Ubuntu is a novice-friendly Linux distribution, but since the majority of it’s users are novices or Windows 11 refugees, they generate a lot of complaints on forums.
Arch is fine, installing it is a good learning experience. After that endeavoros does what I need to and I just have to click next a couple times and get on with my day.
Endeavour is nice, I use it on my main PC because some of their util scripts are nice to have. Arch itself just is not much harder to install these days with the current installer.
I don’t get it (Jesus, What have I started ?)
A lot of arch users are kids fucking with thinkpads ricing up their systems and putting anime wallppapers while not doing anything serious.
Ubuntu is commonly used by researchers and hardware developers who don’t really care about distro as long as it’s linux. The amount of times I saw people use the entire distro with default gnome skin just to launch a terminal to run their black hole simulation, the crypto cracker or some centrifuge control script… I myself am neither but ubuntu has been my go to as well since I usually don’t have time to screw with archinstall, so I just use ubuntu as good starting point and then tweak the internals as I go.
Hmm. They have some surprisingly good documentation and user forums for a bunch of kids just fooling around. Very much unlike Ubuntu. I’ve learned years ago that Arch has good HOWTOs and solutions to common Linux problems that you won’t easily find elsewhere, while you better avoid Ubuntu’s forums unless you want to pick the one correct answer out of hundreds of posts guessing blindly at trivial questions. I have been using Debian for 25 years, so I don’t have a horse in that race, it’s just what I noticed.
I feel like I’m the odd person out, using Arch like most people use Windows. I play games, do taxes, shop online, and do very minimal customizing, mostly just in KDE settings.
It’s a shockingly stable system for how “bleeding edge” it is.
Yeah same, and I only run updates like once every two weeks.
Wait, that’s not what you’re supposed to do?
No you’re supposed to rice the hell out of your Arch install, put an anime girl wallpaper, some form of neofetch replacement (RIP), and post screenshots about it while wearing programmer socks and loudly telling people how good arch is and how much their distro sucks.
Then complain about how you broke it and can’t fix it because you used
archinstallthereby skipping the setup and recovery lessons, and didn’t read the wiki before updating.Arch users have the most whacky, customized computers you can find. Meanwhile arch itself is a small distro with very little features out the box.
Ubuntu as a distro has tons of features out the box but ubuntu users generally just keep the default without adding or using any features.
I think a statistic about how much of your userbase keeps the default config could be a testament to how good your OS is
How do you even measure that? If you add a single line to some dot config you’ve changed a config. Further, a huge group of people intentionally want to be supplied configs that are minimal so they can edit them how they please.
But that would mean templeOS is the best.
Wait…
I think it is a testament of how bloated it is. I mean, we could get 20 Linux users together, list every package we have collectively installed, and produce a new distro with all of those packages that would serve all 20 of us without needing to add anything else. But our new distro would easily be the largest available, and none of us would use everything we’ve included.
Arch, a community-driven distro that hostorically required heavy use of the terminal to even install. It presents itself as very sleek and utilitarian (hence plain black girl). Arch users tend toward enthusiasts also commonly in the anime, furry etc. fandoms. Wearers of “Programming socks” almost certainly use arch (hence rainbow girl).
Ubuntu was historically marketed as the distro for everyone. Ready out of the box, polished GUI, media codecs, marketing materials made by someone who got paid to do them (hence rainbow girl). Ubuntu these days is an exceedingly corporate distro, Canonical really wants to be Microsoft. Ubuntu is very commonly used on servers for commercial and enterprise solutions and end-user desktops are vestigial at this point (hence plain black girl).
Fortunately this is wrong. They invest quite a bit into their desktop releases. They even have a small team that tests the Steam snap alone to make sure it works.
The recent addition of triple buffering into GNOME was a contribution of an an Ubuntu engineer. And if you look at the sponsor pages of projects like KDE you will see Canonical. I think they very much care, they just don’t fold under pressure from comment sections.
I think the joke is on how people customize the visuals of their distro vs how the distro presents itself.
Arch is hard to install, hard to configure, and hard to use, because it requires cryptic commandline knowledge at every step.
People who use Arch generally know very well what they are doing, so their system works with no issues, which they never forget to mention in every conversation.
Ubuntu is a novice-friendly Linux distribution, but since the majority of it’s users are novices or Windows 11 refugees, they generate a lot of complaints on forums.
Half thought take that’s potentially a hot take, don’t cancel me! If pacman had better flag names this wouldn’t be as big of a problem.
EndeavorOS supremacy gang rise up
Cachy RAHHHH
Arch is fine, installing it is a good learning experience. After that endeavoros does what I need to and I just have to click next a couple times and get on with my day.
It is a good learning experience, I learned that I don’t want to do that ever again, I just want to click next.
Or we’re just old
Arch being hard to install and configure hasn’t really been true since
archinstallmatured enough for regular use.Especially not since EndeavorOS.
Endeavour is nice, I use it on my main PC because some of their util scripts are nice to have. Arch itself just is not much harder to install these days with the current installer.
But the vibes!
“cryptic command like knowledge” which is mostly acquirable from 2 or 3 minutes reading the wiki.
Idk, I would probably just say it’s more flexible, but less discoverable.
I may be crazy but I find Arch a lot easier to use than Ubuntu.
Maybe because it is “zippier”. IDK.