Linux

48310 readers

645 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
No misinformation
No NSFW content
No hate speech, bigotry, etc

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

AgreeableLandscape@lemmy.ml

nooter692@lemmy.ml

MarcellusDrum@lemmy.ml

cypherpunks@lemmy.ml

cyclohexane@lemmy.ml

d3Xt3r@lemmy.nz

-17

I'd like to get away from "arch bad for new users" (lemmy.world)

submitted 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) by squid_slime@lemmy.world to c/linux@lemmy.ml

45 comments fedilink hide all child comments

When I say arch I mean the arch distro and all of its offspring.

Endeavouros

Arch-gui

~~Manjaro~~

Artix --maybe not though

My first enjoyable distro was manjaro, the manjaro element less so but using arch clicked for me. But even so if my first experience was using arch and archinstall then yes its not the easiest but its also not that difficult, arch is treated like a boss battle in darksouls.

So when a pre configured GUI arch is recommend I would like to see less scar mongering.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] squid_slime@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Hell if someone seemed like they didn't want to read the wiki or learn some bash and it was case of a youtube-machine, then I'd not recommend arch. But I do think some newbies are smarter and willing than the community will give them credit for.

I wish I was recommended arch off of the bat as I kept dipping my toes in Debian based distros for years before I'd face the darksouls boss. It was detrimental to my transition to Linux. Some people move from windows wanting that control over they're systems.

Anyway I posted this as an IT professional posted earlier about there unsuccessful and painful transition to Linux through Ubuntu and distros alike and a commenter mention arch and instantly got chewed out.

"Arch isn't for noobies" is a catch phrase at this point and I see people repeat it mindlessly

[–] z3rOR0ne@lemmy.ml 2 points 9 months ago

I'm in general agreement on that. If the person is coming from a somewhat technical background, or is simply curious about learning the ins and outs of their system, then Arch is as good a choice as any imho.

In some cases, Arch is a better choice if you need more up to date software (although 3rd party packagers like Flatpak appear to solve many of these issues on scheduled release distros as well).

There sadly is a lot of gate keeping in the Linux community which leads to a lot of blanket statements that pervaid discussions, especially when it comes to how best to grow the Linux community. And "don't recommend Arch or Arch bases distros to noobs" is one of them.

Should you recommend Arch to a new Linux user? The answer is never a direct "yes" or "no", but rather, as always, "it depends."