3 ms·

> Manjaro just repackages the same thing with a harder-to-use and more confusing GUI which people are more willing to give a spin. Lol, if it was harder to use

> Manjaro just repackages the same thing with a harder-to-use and more confusing GUI which people are more willing to give a spin. Lol, if it was harder to use people would use archinstall instead.

talldayo 2y ago
I disagree. Archinstall has better disk partitioning tools, more options and a more logical and clear setup menu. The reason people do not use it and prefer Manjaro instead is because it has a GUI, despite the fact that it is objectively a worse interface. I say this as a former Arch/Manjaro user that had to reinstall his system every 2 months. Once you get over the "text on a screen is scary" phase it's immediately clear how Archinstall is a better installer. To be clear I consider neither OS suitable for daily driving with so many better alternatives out there, but Archinstall is feared by many for practically no reason.
- jklinger410 2y ago
  Well maybe after decades of evidence developers will come to grips with the fact that, for most users, a GUI is always better than a text interface. Or you can keep shouting into a void, your choice.
  - talldayo 2y ago
    If you are a normal person, you should not be installing Arch Linux. Manjaro doesn't change that by making it easier to install, it baits users in with AUR packages and inevitably disappoints them because it's breaks your system even more often than Homebrew does.
  - consteval 2y ago
    Better in what metric? The problem with users, of pretty much anything, is that they're stupid. Even me! I am stupid. When I buy a car, I'm not so worried about the drive train or the complexity of the transmission or how viscous the oil it uses is. Because that I don't understand. Pretty colors, sharp lines, and a good price makes my decisions. But those are surface level. GUIs may attract more users, perhaps that's a metric they're better in. That doesn't make them faster to use, or even easier to use! Users greatly skew towards familiarity, but typically familiarity in surface-level ways only.

> Manjaro just repackages the same thing with a harder-to-use and more confusing GUI which people are more willing to give a spin. Lol, if it was harder to use people would use archinstall instead.

talldayo 2y ago

I disagree. Archinstall has better disk partitioning tools, more options and a more logical and clear setup menu. The reason people do not use it and prefer Manjaro instead is because it has a GUI, despite the fact that it is objectively a worse interface. I say this as a former Arch/Manjaro user that had to reinstall his system every 2 months. Once you get over the "text on a screen is scary" phase it's immediately clear how Archinstall is a better installer. To be clear I consider neither OS suitable for daily driving with so many better alternatives out there, but Archinstall is feared by many for practically no reason.

jklinger410 2y ago
Well maybe after decades of evidence developers will come to grips with the fact that, for most users, a GUI is always better than a text interface. Or you can keep shouting into a void, your choice.
- talldayo 2y ago
  If you are a normal person, you should not be installing Arch Linux. Manjaro doesn't change that by making it easier to install, it baits users in with AUR packages and inevitably disappoints them because it's breaks your system even more often than Homebrew does.
- consteval 2y ago
  Better in what metric? The problem with users, of pretty much anything, is that they're stupid. Even me! I am stupid. When I buy a car, I'm not so worried about the drive train or the complexity of the transmission or how viscous the oil it uses is. Because that I don't understand. Pretty colors, sharp lines, and a good price makes my decisions. But those are surface level. GUIs may attract more users, perhaps that's a metric they're better in. That doesn't make them faster to use, or even easier to use! Users greatly skew towards familiarity, but typically familiarity in surface-level ways only.