4 ms·

I don't think many would call Arch "boring technology". It's a cutting-edge distro, and it is designed with the expectation that you will read the wiki, since y

• doubled112 3y ago
  I don't think it's near as "exciting" as many make it sound though. These days I usually run Debian on my personal machines, before anybody thinks it's fanboy-ism or Stockholm Syndrome. I've been using Arch on and off for a while. Back before systemd, and it had an installer. I can't remember anything earth shattering in quite some time. Certainly no big paradigm shifts. Packages are up to date, but they're the developer's latest release. If something is broken, wait for the fix to be released and that's about it. I ran ~15-20 developer workstations on Arch for a couple of years. They were there before me. Being a Java shop, we managed our JDKs/IDE outside of the system packages.
• bee_rider 3y ago
  Arch stays pretty close to upstream and rolling release means you only get little updates, no version upgrades. It is boring in the “don’t do anything unexpected and avoid catastrophic changes” sense.
• Ferret7446 3y ago
  Arch is not what I would call cutting-edge, and I would call it boring. The overriding philosophy of Arch is simplicity. That simplicity pushes the burden of having some basic understanding onto the user, as many kinds of guided tutorials and wizards are anything but simple. > it is designed with the expectation that you will read the wiki It is designed with the expectation that you will read the documentation, which is true for many things, as a simple example, many home appliances.