I still don't understand why people think Arch is so great compared to Debian based distros

I still don't understand why people think Arch is so great compared to Debian based distros

A Conspiracy Theorist Is Talking Shirt $21.68

POSIWID: The Purpose Of A System Is What It Does Shirt $21.68

A Conspiracy Theorist Is Talking Shirt $21.68

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I'll do you one better, why do you think debian is so great compared to rolling release distros?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      It doesn't break.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        neither does anything for me

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        I've installed both on two different PCs this week and I think they're both good for different purposes
        With Debian I found I didn't have as much control during the install process, but in Arch I could have btrfs, efistub, I used to use ZFS too which was moronic but I wouldn't easily have been able to find that out in Debian
        On the other hand Debian was zero work to get to a basically working state, although part of that was using a DE for the first time in a while

        neither does anything for me

        for me, when things break on hand hold systems it's less frequent but more opaque
        arch breaks more often (though not that often), but I find it easier to fix too

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        isn't debian 12.5 literally broken for nvidia gpus? and I don't think they have fixed it yet

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          That's the only thing I have to criticize about Debian. NVIDIA drivers NEED to be shipped updated, and they don't bring the most recent version even at the experimental branch. Even Almalinux and Rocky, when you use RPMFusion, the drivers come in a kinda recent version and you have the option to also use a more recent kernel if you want.

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I refuse to use systemd distros

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    It isn't
    Arch is a meme distro for plebs to feel 1337 because they can read.

    Arch's stripped down kernel is a joke
    The package count is a joke
    AUR is a security and maintenance nightmare (basically unusable) where only plebs state otherwise out of lack of understanding

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      post desktop

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    archinstall is nice. the aur is nice. it's just pleasant and easy to use

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >the aur is nice. it's just pleasant and easy to use
      Lambs to the slaughter (ngmi)

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        debian users enjoying their 5 year old packages

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Debian users also enjoy the quickest security patches
          go seethe somewhere else.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            where do those patches come from?

          • 1 month ago
            Sneedy Pie

            unironically Ubuntu and Fedora
            I hate Arch. I immediately lose respect for anyone who runs it, and especially those who advocate it. Here’s why:
            Name 20 features, release-for-release or year-for-year that have not come from Ubuntu. Ubuntu basically runs the show when it comes to Linux. This includes things like NetworkManager, Unity, Xorg, GCC, glibc, LVM, KVM, kernel, file systems et al. Ubuntu has developers making significant contributions to the entire FOSS software stack upstream.
            Arch on the other hand pulls most of the heavy weight packaging from compiling binaries manually. They then perform minor patching and testing. It generally lags behind Fedora by a release or two in parts of the software stack. I never see @arch email addresses in upstream changelogs.
            So tell me again, how exactly does Arch innovate? They even struggle to release a new, even somehow more broken version of pacman with each release, and being a hipster is about the only original thing in Arch.
            Yes, Arch is unstable because they are standing on the shoulders of giants. Most of the hard work is hashed out before they ever import software into their repositories. This is fine, and what FOSS is all about, but I prefer to be in with the leaders rather than the followers.
            What really irks me and what has really brewed my hatred are Arch users. They seem to think Arch makes them a super elite secret hacker straight out of the Matrix. I have just proven how false this is. In my experience, Arch support mechanisms (IRC, mailing lists, forums, wiki) are much less helpful than the alternative.
            If you want a nice desktop distro, run Fedora or Ubuntu. If you like control, run Gentoo. If you need stability, run RHEL/CentOS or Debian. But please, don’t feed the hipster magnet that is Arch!

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            there's no reason to run gentoo when you can run arch, unless you really just want to build your environment from scratch or like compile flags.
            I don't use arch and I don't care about zoomers that want to act cool by using it, it's a perfectly fine distro and has its uses.

            >where do those patches come from?
            Debian's dedicated security team

            >t. arch gets it directly from upstream in testing branch so it's faster
            Along with 58264748626 additional untested vulnerabilities and bugs

            >Debian's dedicated security team
            the same ones that broke wifi recently? kek
            they're backporting fixes from the latest kernel and such. You can thank arch users for doing the beta testing for you.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >there's no reason to run gentoo when you can run arch
            You can't be serious. There's no comparison. Gentoo offers actual control, you have USE flags, you can enable testing shit for specific packages without enabling the entire testing repository like on arch, you have binaries if you want, non-standard configurations, etc. If you're looking for customization gentoo is the answer, I have to agree that arch really has no place and they are too quick to move packages to 'stable'.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            I'm communicating to you now off a cellphone processor, running arch, which has 15 broken firmware issues that show up in logs, but still runs fine. That number is much large on other distros. There's no better choice for a bleeding edge mini/micro computer build. The processor is from last year

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >where do those patches come from?
            Debian's dedicated security team

            >t. arch gets it directly from upstream in testing branch so it's faster
            Along with 58264748626 additional untested vulnerabilities and bugs

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          I use LMDE and never had any issues with software versions. Is true that with the exception of Micro and Geany, I use almost everything in Flatpak or Appimage, to don't have any chance of problems.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            I don't like flatpaks. The only time I've ever used them is for proprietary applications because they're sandboxed. Other than that, when a program is only available thru flatpak.
            Outside of these 2 scenarios, I avoid flatpaks like the plague. I hate how huge they are and it's completely unnecessary to use them over packages provided by your distro.
            This is why I will never use a stable distro. I like having the latest (or close to latest) packages with fedora. It's almost as up to date as arch 99% of the time and I don't have any issues with my system breaking. The only other distro I would ever use is opensuse since I think they're the only other ones that have something similar to this.

  5. 1 month ago
    Sneedy Pie

    Top 5 reasons why Arch Linux sucks:

    1) Lead arch developer got his computer hacked 3 times. see: https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=12192&p=1
    2) Unstable. Go check out arch's forum instead of listening to the fanboy to see the enormous amounts of issues.
    3) Unprofessional. Arch isn't used in any professional environment for a good reason. Made by amateurs.
    4) Community. Pretentious, trendy, ricer, hippie morons.
    5) Forum. Full of noob questions (can't help it as majority is ex-ubuntu users) and have you signed up a account and saw the off-topic section? They closed it to non-members for a reason. They try so hard acting like a /b/tard. (real example: "i'm 12 and what is this," troll face, /b/ images, etc.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Unprofessional. Arch isn't used in any professional environment for a good reason. Made by amateurs.
      SteamOS says hello
      Everything else is made up or a fallacy

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        steamOS isn't arch nor made by amateurs

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        You're comparing a distro made by a corporation that use curated Arch packages with Arch. SteamOS is a product to make X stuff done, Arch is just the opposite to that.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Unprofessional. Arch isn't used in any professional environment for a good reason. Made by amateurs.
      SteamOS says hello
      Everything else is made up or a fallacy

      >Unprofessional. Arch isn't used in any professional environment for a good reason. Made by amateurs.

      It's used by Nvidia employees.

      https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/geforce-rtx-arm-gdc/

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I don't understand why people think Arch is good vs NixOS but you don't see me making a thread about it.

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    it's quite simply, having recent packages is very important for regular usage.
    I'm sure debian is fine for servers, but i need my latest neovim, winehq... for day to day use

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Almost everyone started out with Debian-based stuff, it's everywhere. Try Arch sometime, earnestly, and you'll probably get it. For me it was getting newer package (yes there's testing/unstable for debian, still older than Arch stuff), and ease of installing certain software that I'd never been able to get working on other distros. The AUR is a bit of a double-edged sword as it gets used as a crutch and leads to fewer things getting packaged officially, plus it's not vetted properly like the main repos, but for a new user it's still often the difference between being able to run x y z software or not.
    Also I found that I had more breakage on Debian's big releases (doing upgrades to existing installs) than the small frequent updates of Arch ever brought, and usually with Arch issues you can figure out what happened and what to do from a news post or a friend, it's like a well-known thing. Debian breakage always felt kinda mysterious. So much stuff changed that it's hard to know what exactly broke.
    Arch is not my favorite distro, I prefer Guix System, but if I ever need a fairly normal and easy-to-use distro to put on a spare machine or a computer someone else will use, I'm more comfortable with Arch than Debian-based stuff at this point.

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Arch works better in VirtualBox. Installing a single package will suffice to get Guest Additions working.
    Also AUR and `yay` in particular, insures you can install nearly everything in the easy and convenient way.

    Debian Stable is too outdated. You need to dance around to install Guest Additions and must reboot your VM every update, because VBox modules fall off each time.
    Also, both `apt` and `aptitude` are terrible. They pull frickton of bloat for each package you install, there are flags to avoid this, but in most cases it breaks the packages because they still have dependencies that you'll have to find out and install manually with appropriate flags again, so your 20Mb package doesn't pull 1.5Gb of optional packages `apt` thinks you need.

    And yes, using Linux on the real hardware as your main OS is moronic.

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >I still don't understand why people think Arch is so great compared to Debian based distros

    Conversation with Gemini
    profile picture
    I still don't understand why people think Arch is so great compared to Debian based distros
    Show drafts

    Arch Linux appeals to users for a few reasons that Debian-based distros might not quite fulfill. Here's the breakdown:

    Bleeding Edge: Arch offers the latest software, which can be great for enthusiasts who want to try new features. Debian Stable prioritizes stability over having the newest software versions.

    Customization: Arch gives you granular control over your system. You pick exactly which components you want during installation and can fine-tune everything. Debian offers pre-configured setups that are easier for beginners.

    AUR (Arch User Repository): This vast repository has tons of software not in the official Arch repos. While Debian has a large repository too, AUR gives access to more niche software.

    Learning Experience: Setting up and maintaining Arch teaches you a lot about Linux under the hood. This can be valuable for users who want to understand how things work.

    However, Arch also has downsides:

    Complexity: Installing and maintaining Arch requires more technical knowledge than Debian-based distros.

    Stability: Since Arch uses newer software, it can be less stable than Debian Stable, which prioritizes long-term stability over cutting-edge features.

    So, if you prioritize customization, bleeding-edge software, and enjoy tinkering, Arch might be a good fit. If you value stability, ease of use, and a beginner-friendly intro to Linux, Debian-based distros might be a better choice.

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Its great for them. Debian is great for you. I like them both. We all love linux.

  12. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    if you use Debian on a desktop you're a complete moron, enjoy your repos filled with broken out of date packages.

  13. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    there is no good.
    Debian is much better for servers.
    Arch linux is much better if you need the latest software versions for development.

  14. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    A rolling release is nice if you have the newest hardware and need new packages for things like gaming. The things is that those are better when a company is behind them like Steam with SteamOS 3 and Suse with Thumbleweed. Community based rolling release is moronic and for the unemployed.

  15. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    because of ANUR

    > Arch Black person User Repository

    you can run packages by other Black folk

  16. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    - Community driven
    - No shit imposed upon you by enterprise
    - AUR
    It feels like actually using open source. Makes me feel much more free than using any other distro. Maybe except gentoo, but I don't have time to compile everything.

  17. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    as IQfyentooman, I agree. Frick Arch users, frick their 1337 attitude, they can go to hell.

  18. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    you need three things to want to use arch
    >no actual use case for your computer
    >lots of free time
    >midwit IQ so you can brag about being able to read a wiki
    i can at least respect gentooschizos and their patience, but it's just laughable how archtards want to be considered radical by being professional ricers

  19. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I've used both in the last few months and am currently on Arch. until now I've never had any issues with updates breaking stuff but then again I'm a user with little software installed. both distros are awesome but Debian Stable is DEFINITELY uber comfy tier

  20. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Arch Linux is good as a toy, but everyone needs something a little more solid to work.

    Debian, Devuan, Mint, Rocky, Alma or even OpenSUSE, Fedora and Ubuntu are much better alternatives to Arch.

  21. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    It's the package manager and build system, if you prefer stability then a debian derivative if you prefer "rolling/always up to date" then an arch derivative.

  22. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    AUR
    URA
    RAU

  23. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Bigger repos. Can install from user repos (AUR is Arch User Repos) and even git, that is, you feed a git link to it, it compiles.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *