Also why does everyone seem to hate on Ubuntu?

  • scoobford@lemmy.zip
    1·
    10 months ago

    Arch has a cult like following because it emphasizes simplicity and customizability. If you have the time to fully administer your own system, there is no better choice.

    Ubuntu is corporate, frequently out of date, and sometimes incompetent. They got big a long time ago when they were a significantly easier option than their competitors, but I really don’t think there’s compelling reason for a new user to install Ubuntu today.

  • Feyd@programming.dev
    1·
    10 months ago

    I like arch because:

    • it is rolling release and I like having up to date software and not having to deal with distro upgrades breaking things
    • it is community run and not beholden to a company
    • packages are mostly unmodified from their upstream
    • the wiki and forums are the best of any distro
  • TwiddleTwaddle@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    1·
    10 months ago

    The shortest answer -

    Arch has really good documentation and a release style that works for a lot of people.

    Ubuntu is coorporitized and less reliable Debian with features that many people dont need or want.

  • sudo@programming.dev
    1·
    10 months ago

    About 10 years ago it was The Distro for first time linux users to prove they were a True Linux Enjoyer. Think a bunch of channers bragging about how they are the true linux master race because they edited a grub config.

    Before Arch that role belonged to Gentoo. Since then that role has transitioned to NixOS who aren’t nearly as toxic but still culty. “Way of the future” etc.

    All three of have high bars of entry so everyone has to take pride in the effort they put in to learn how to install their distro. Like getting hazed into a frat except you actually learn something.

    The Ubuntu hatred is completely unrelated. That has to do with them being a corporate distro that keep making bad design decisions. And their ubiquity means everyone has to deal with their bad decisions. (snap bad)

    • MimicJar@lemmy.world
      2·
      10 months ago

      Before Arch that role belonged to Gentoo.

      To add, before the change the Gentoo wiki was a top resource when it came to Linux questions. Even if you didn’t use Gentoo you could find detailed information on how various parts of Linux worked.

      One day the Gentoo wiki died. It got temporary mirrors quickly, but it took a long time to get up and working again. This left a huge opening for another wiki, the Arch wiki, to become the new top resource.

      I suspect, for a number of reasons, Arch was always going to replace Gentoo as the “True Linux Explorer”, but the wiki outage accelerated it.

    • NotSteve_@piefed.caEnglish
      1·
      10 months ago

      This is it mostly for sure. I used to be that True Linux Enjoyer. I still install arch sometimes but I only ever use an arch-derived distribution now that comes with an installer. I already feel like there’s not enough time in the day without having to manually copy files off a USB stick

      • exu@feditown.comEnglish
        0·
        10 months ago

        None of the usual installers can do what I want unfortunately, so I’m stuck doing it myself.

          • exu@feditown.comEnglish
            0·
            10 months ago

            BTRFS with LUKS (OpenSUSE gets close), but using rEFInd as bootloader. Snapper snapshots, Zram.

            I’m actually thinking about switching to systemd-boot with Secure Boot, TPM2 and stuff, so even further from mainstream installers.

            • FrederikNJS@lemmy.zip
              1·
              10 months ago

              Last time I used EndeavourOS, I managed to get the graphical installer to install BTRFS on LUKS, it did require custom partitioning in the graphical installer, snapper just worked after that.

              Zram (or was it Zswap?) was pretty easy to enable after installatiok

              The bootloader might be beyond what the graphical installer can do though… I never really bothered switching…