3 ms·

I agree that installation requires more learning than other distros, but once you get past that I don't understand the problem. I think Arch "just works", too,

by nsajko 6y ago

I agree that installation requires more learning than other distros, but once you get past that I don't understand the problem. I think Arch "just works", too, and I don't see how Manjaro could be better in that regard considering it is closely related to Arch. BTW, you do know you don't ever need to reinstall Arch (on a single machine)? EDIT: > I'm tired of all the tinkering. I'm tired of the additional cognitive load of all the things I have to make sure is configured right. I already waste hours of my day just getting tooling to work for whatever god awful language I have to work with that day. I just want things to work. Manjaro just works. I definitely understand that, but I feel that if I went to Manjaro or Debian or whatever the added complexity would make debugging much more annoying.

Sevaris 6y ago
> BTW, you do know you don't ever need to reinstall Arch (on a single machine)? People say this, but I've found plenty of reason to reinstall Arch (none of it necessarily having to do with Arch, and more trying different distros out of curiosity and Arch remaining my main distro). I always have these discussions with Arch veterans who seem so incredulous about my frustrations with Arch. And I sort of chalk it down to the fact that I ended up installing Arch anew more often than once a year and the last time you or some other vet installed Arch was years ago. I think there's a fundamental disconnect between Arch vets and beginners (or even intermediates), which is clearly shown by the scrapping of the excellent beginner's guide.
- nsajko 6y ago
  > scrapping of the excellent beginner's guide I gather that you simply want something more opinionated than Arch, and that is OK, even the BSDs have a more opinionated install procedure than Arch. But FTR scrapping the "Beginner's guide" was done for really good reasons: it duplicated the content of other Wiki articles, which is a maintainability nightmare, and was too opinionated for Arch. All the content should still be accessible by wiki links to other Arch wiki articles.
  - Sevaris 6y ago
    > I gather that you simply want something more opinionated than Arch, and that is OK, even the BSDs have a more opinionated install procedure than Arch. Yes, this is why I emphasized the "install and go" aspect of Manjaro. It requires a certain amount of "opinionatedness" by the maintainers, which of course isn't a priority for Arch, which is also fine. I saw and understood the reasons for scrapping the beginner's guide. I still disagreed with it. All I saw was that the Arch community was unwilling to provide for beginners. Yes, it's a lot of effort and it is to a degree duplication, but it's duplication in the same way that Simple Wikipedia is a duplication of Wikipedia. It sort of is, but it sort of isn't. It's duplicated effort, definitely, and if you don't prioritize onboarding beginners, then it's also wasted effort. But as somebody who personally used the guide a lot, as somebody who takes no pleasure in scouring through 5 different 30 page long wiki pages to find an answer to something trivial, the documentation as is simply isn't an adequate replacement for the beginner's guide. I've accepted that the Arch community has decided that it's the best solution, but I won't stop criticizing them in discussions like this for sacrificing such a great resource just because we happen to have different priorities.
  - sergeykish 6y ago
    Sorry, I can't agree about scrapping "Beginners guide". Ubuntu gave me simple install. Once I've started tinkering it become broken. Following Installation guide and Beginners guide I got stable system with internet connection without Gnome toolbar widget. I could build on top of it. These days I stick with Arch because of fresh packages, rolling release, makepkg and AUR. Just looking at https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Network_interface https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Network_interface is enough to stick with wifi-menu / wpa_supplicant.

by nsajko 6y ago

Sevaris 6y ago

> BTW, you do know you don't ever need to reinstall Arch (on a single machine)? People say this, but I've found plenty of reason to reinstall Arch (none of it necessarily having to do with Arch, and more trying different distros out of curiosity and Arch remaining my main distro). I always have these discussions with Arch veterans who seem so incredulous about my frustrations with Arch. And I sort of chalk it down to the fact that I ended up installing Arch anew more often than once a year and the last time you or some other vet installed Arch was years ago. I think there's a fundamental disconnect between Arch vets and beginners (or even intermediates), which is clearly shown by the scrapping of the excellent beginner's guide.

nsajko 6y ago
> scrapping of the excellent beginner's guide I gather that you simply want something more opinionated than Arch, and that is OK, even the BSDs have a more opinionated install procedure than Arch. But FTR scrapping the "Beginner's guide" was done for really good reasons: it duplicated the content of other Wiki articles, which is a maintainability nightmare, and was too opinionated for Arch. All the content should still be accessible by wiki links to other Arch wiki articles.
- Sevaris 6y ago
  > I gather that you simply want something more opinionated than Arch, and that is OK, even the BSDs have a more opinionated install procedure than Arch. Yes, this is why I emphasized the "install and go" aspect of Manjaro. It requires a certain amount of "opinionatedness" by the maintainers, which of course isn't a priority for Arch, which is also fine. I saw and understood the reasons for scrapping the beginner's guide. I still disagreed with it. All I saw was that the Arch community was unwilling to provide for beginners. Yes, it's a lot of effort and it is to a degree duplication, but it's duplication in the same way that Simple Wikipedia is a duplication of Wikipedia. It sort of is, but it sort of isn't. It's duplicated effort, definitely, and if you don't prioritize onboarding beginners, then it's also wasted effort. But as somebody who personally used the guide a lot, as somebody who takes no pleasure in scouring through 5 different 30 page long wiki pages to find an answer to something trivial, the documentation as is simply isn't an adequate replacement for the beginner's guide. I've accepted that the Arch community has decided that it's the best solution, but I won't stop criticizing them in discussions like this for sacrificing such a great resource just because we happen to have different priorities.
- sergeykish 6y ago
  Sorry, I can't agree about scrapping "Beginners guide". Ubuntu gave me simple install. Once I've started tinkering it become broken. Following Installation guide and Beginners guide I got stable system with internet connection without Gnome toolbar widget. I could build on top of it. These days I stick with Arch because of fresh packages, rolling release, makepkg and AUR. Just looking at https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Network_interface https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Network_interface is enough to stick with wifi-menu / wpa_supplicant.