PS. This is not a critique to Debian-based distros. And i’m not suggesting you to skip Ubintu for Arch either. Arch is a bit advanced and not too easy to new users, so that won’t do for some people…
… just install Linux Mint instead.
You must log in or # to comment.
As an Arch user I hate these memes. Guys, the only difference between distros is effectively the versions of packages you’re getting, and what the default packages and configs are. In Ubuntu you are completely free to have a very minimal i3 setup (I did for several years!) while in Arch you can use some bloated Gnome UI. This “Arch is fast and Ubuntu is slow” really isn’t true if you compare Arch-Gnome vs Ubuntu-Gnome, or Arch-i3 vs Ubuntu-i3.
really isn’t true if you conpare Arch-Gnome vs Ubuntu-Gnome,
So what I’m hearing is “Fuck Gnome”?
This shitpost was bought to you by the KDE/XFCE gang collab
it does feel package installs are much faster on arch than on Debian. Then again, Debian probably has a bunch of precautionary steps when installing a package, such as checking for dependencies/dependency conflicts and verifying the package has been installed without error.
that said this is all true, your desktop environment uses a lot of memory gnome uses something along the lines of 1GB and same goes witu KDE. I’ve optimized my memory usage very well with mangoWM, on idle it uses like 600 MB. My browser uses more memory than my entire OS.
Mint user: I don’t care how much RAM my system uses as long as it works.
I dunno. There are some of us who run Mint not because we don’t know what we’re doing but because we do* and we don’t want to have to deal with any more nonsense than we absolutely have to.
From that small cohort, there are those of us who’ll frown when all we have open is a few browser tabs and the system’s using 8GB of RAM, twice the “recommended” spec. On startup with nothing running it’s over 1GB.
It’s hard not to see it as wasteful when you’re old enough to remember perfectly good machines running on single-digit megabytes. **
* Or at least, think we do.
** Yes, things are much more complex these days. But are they really a thousand times more complex?
The typical path: Mint -> Arch -> Fedora.
3 years later and I’m still on Mint.
Also a sensible choice tbh.
Same. No reason to switch as I have no desire to tinker
Ibwish more linux people had this mentality of “if its not broke don’t fix it”. After years of floating around different distros, I just want something that works, is stable, and the OOTB is easy and works. So I’ve just gone back to mint debian edition. Idc, I don’t have time to be tinkering with my computer
Why go past Arch? What’s the use case/flavor?
As someone who uses arch, its just stability. Arch is great for a hobby, if you want to do work, use fedora. Its so much simpler. That being said, I love arch because of the tinkering, and that lack of tinkering is why I switched off fedora.
I “do work” just fine on Arch but maybe I’ve just gotten used to the quirks and the DIY aspect of it. None of it is an obstacle to productivity anymore.
I do realize I’m not the average person and am some kind of freak that likes to take working stuff apart and put it back together for funsies.
Some people just need an OS that works and don’t have time to waste on tinkering and fixing it every so often
