4 ms·

Probably you read to much Arch users comments, many servers run Ubuntu LTS , and many desktops run Ubuntu or Kubuntu. I tried Debian, Sidux, Arch, Chakra, Fedo

Probably you read to much Arch users comments, many servers run Ubuntu LTS , and many desktops run Ubuntu or Kubuntu. I tried Debian, Sidux, Arch, Chakra, Fedora, Mandriva, Mint and others and for last 10 years I am happy back on Kubuntu LTS , there is no magic on the other distros that give you performance and I do my work on this PC, game on wine/Proton, I have latest NVIDIA driver. The reason I use LTS is because I do not need the latest features+ latest bugs combo from upstream, I can fix the current bugs and wait a few year until I am forced to upgrade. Btw some Ubuntu developers are also Debian developers so using Mint or other Debian based sitro is still benefiting from ubuntu devs work.

resource_waste 2y ago
What is it with Debian-family people saying the word 'Arch'. "Debian is outdated and cant be used with Nvid---" "ARCH" "ARCH sucks, too hard" what? I never mentioned Arch. There is some sickness going on with Debian-family members, to see this 'Arch' line across the internet when literally no one mentions Arch, makes me think there some fear mongering going on.
- simion314 2y ago
  It is decades of Arch toxicity, other distros not only Debian based will confirm it. Arch is an OK distro but their kernel is not faster then a Debian kernel, I run Arch for a whle, I compiled the kernel with the flags for my CPU, I build the required modules into the kernel so it loads a second faster, there was no systemd so I also optimized the boot services. I had a ton of free time. But then I did not had free time, and screwing with the kernel and latest upstream bugs was no longer fun. So as an experienced ex Arch user, there is no magic shit Arch puts in their kernel to make it faster, the horror story you hear about Ubuntu is newbs having issue with GNOME and breaking it by tring to put customization in a DE that does not allow it.
  - resource_waste 2y ago
    Debianers have to have an enemy to justify their existence to still use Debian. If not for Arch, they might have tried a good distro.
    - simion314 2y ago
      >they might have tried a good distro. Can you read and comprehend at the same time ? I used Arch and Chakra and other distros. or you claim Arch and the distros are mentioned are BAD.

resource_waste 2y ago

What is it with Debian-family people saying the word 'Arch'. "Debian is outdated and cant be used with Nvid---" "ARCH" "ARCH sucks, too hard" what? I never mentioned Arch. There is some sickness going on with Debian-family members, to see this 'Arch' line across the internet when literally no one mentions Arch, makes me think there some fear mongering going on.

simion314 2y ago
It is decades of Arch toxicity, other distros not only Debian based will confirm it. Arch is an OK distro but their kernel is not faster then a Debian kernel, I run Arch for a whle, I compiled the kernel with the flags for my CPU, I build the required modules into the kernel so it loads a second faster, there was no systemd so I also optimized the boot services. I had a ton of free time. But then I did not had free time, and screwing with the kernel and latest upstream bugs was no longer fun. So as an experienced ex Arch user, there is no magic shit Arch puts in their kernel to make it faster, the horror story you hear about Ubuntu is newbs having issue with GNOME and breaking it by tring to put customization in a DE that does not allow it.
- resource_waste 2y ago
  Debianers have to have an enemy to justify their existence to still use Debian. If not for Arch, they might have tried a good distro.
  - simion314 2y ago
    >they might have tried a good distro. Can you read and comprehend at the same time ? I used Arch and Chakra and other distros. or you claim Arch and the distros are mentioned are BAD.