this post was submitted on 03 Jun 2024
187 points (88.5% liked)
Linux
48881 readers
998 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Says who? The days when this was true are long gone. Ubuntu is no longer the user friendly everyman's desktop system anymore. Arch is extremely user friendly, just not the installation process. I find it to be much less of a pain in the ass to use than Debian based systems. For one, you have the Arch User Repository, so you're very unlikely to need to not be able to find some software you want, and more importantly, so many packages in Debian are out of date and they take forever to update them, stuff often breaks because the version needed as a dependency for something else is not in the repositories.
For people who want to use arch but don't want to manually do everything I highly recommend EndeavorOS. You fly through a wizard, just like Mint or something desktop oriented, and you wind up with a nice, working environment, but it's Arch tooling instead of Debian tooling. The biggest and for most people only noticeable difference is the package manager, and pacman is so much more robust than apt.
I get frustrated online when I see people saying "Ubuntu is the most user friendly distro" or "arch is not for noobs", this stuff was true like 10 years ago, that's no longer the case. Ubuntu is user hostile, and there are arch derivatives that are basically arch with a graphical installer, which is the only part of using arch that is hard for people who aren't hardcore nerds. It's not like Gentoo or Void or Alpine or Nix or running a BSD system or something advanced like that.
Agreed.
I do wonder what your definition of user friendly is. Cuz I can't fathom how you can think that a distro that subscribes to what's quoted below can (by any stretch of the imagination) be considered user friendly.
"Note: It is imperative to keep up to date with changes in Arch Linux that require manual intervention before upgrading your system. Subscribe to the arch-announce mailing list or the recent news RSS feed. Alternatively, check the front page Arch news every time before you update."
Which simple means that you have to check if you can update before you actually perform an update. That's just wild.
And you know what's most curious about this, we've actually solved (within Linux) issues related to updating your system. You read that correct, it's a solved problem. And I hope that you'll benefit from these advancements even if you continue to use Arch.
Btw, please don't come to me with packages that automatically pop up in terminal to inform you about manual intervention. On my system, updates occur automatically in the background and with some black magic shenanigans (or just great engineering) it 'fixes' itself without requiring any manual intervention from me. That pop-up message in terminal can't compete with that.
That's subjective, but sure; you're absolutely free to think that.
Distrobox exists. Moving on.
What do you mean with robust here? And what makes you think that
pacmanis much more robust thanapt? Thank you in advance for clarifying/elaborating!Honestly, I actually agree with you. Ubuntu has indeed lost all of its credibility. And Arch is absolutely not as bad as people make it out to be. But! In an environment in which Linux Mint, Zorin OS, Pop!_OS, Bazzite are mentioned; Arch simply is (by contrast) the lesser option in terms easy of use etc. So, while in absolute terms, it's definitely not as bad as peeps make it out to be. It is, compared to the earlier mentioned distros, simply less newbie friendly.
Thankfully, no one ever bothers to recommend these to new users 😉.
So, to be clear, these are clearly too advanced and thankfully people never recommend these to newer users. However, while Arch isn't that bad and thus can be used by some newbie users, it should IMO only very very carefully be recommended to new users. If it's the kind of person that likes to learn as they go and enjoys reading documentation, then (by all means) it's absolutely fine to recommend it. But you won't find them that frequently...
In my 10 years around the Linux ecosystem, I've never seen anyone recommend Red Hat to new home desktop users.
Ubuntu has joined Red Hat. It's a corporate server distro now.
Go look at their website. More corporate logos than a Cup series stock car. Just figuring out which version you should download so you get a "normal desktop" is a task bigger than it should be. Back on the stupid bad old website I came across a guy who said he "installed Ubuntu but it didn't come with APT" and I'm like "wtf...did you install Ubuntu Core, their Snap-only IoT thing?" And he stopped responding.
Actually I'm going to accuse Fedora of doing this too. You kind of have to know "Fedora WorkStation" is the Gnome version which is considered the default, "Spins" are the versions with other DEs, and "Silverblue" is the immutable file system version.
Great observation on Ubuntu and drawing parallels to Red Hat.
I'm mixed on this. It's a fact that Fedora Workstation receives the most love from Fedora. And while it's undeniable that they also put a lot of effort into all DEs that they support, none come as polished as WorkStation. One might argue that the way different installations are found on Linux Mint's website isn't that different to what Fedora does on theirs.
In the fact that they offer several DEs with one being their flagship, and then having one or two weird other things going on, like Silverblue or LMDE? Yeah that's similar.
The presentation is very different, with Mint being way less bullshit about it. Go to Mint's website, click Download and you're presented with three choices, from top to bottom: Cinnamon Edition, Xfce Edition and MATE Edition, with brief descriptions of each. Cinnamon Edition is at the top and says it is the most popular/primarily developed for Linux Mint, so it heavily indicates that's the flagship flavor. LMDE has a separate page.
If you click on "New Features" you are given a list of specific features, like the stuff they've done to the Hypnotix internet TV viewer, or new features of Cinnamon 6.0. Everything here is factual and verifiable.
Go to Fedora's download page and you're presented first with a big useless graphic that says "It's your operating system", with choices for Workstation, Server, IoT Cloud, and CoreOS below that. The short marketing blurb says Workstation is "...for laptop and desktop computers" so let's click Learn More. And we get a page full of ultimately meaningless marketeering wank like "Reliable, Beautiful, Leading Technology" with very few verifiable facts at all. The word "Gnome" is not mentioned anywhere.
So it's difficult to learn that Workstation ships with Gnome from their website, and it's also not 100% intuitive to find out how to get the other DE versions, which are farther down on the page in a different looking section titled "Want more Fedora options?" under Fedora Spins. It would be much more intuitive if the "Workstation" button led you to a page with the Gnome Edition on top with a blurb about it being the most popular, flagship edition, with alternative choices listed below.
Similarly, people on forums casually talk about Fedora Silverblue, which is the immutable file system container-based version. Except you will find nowhere on the main downloads page that says the word "Silverblue." You'll find it under Atomic Desktops. Silverblue is specifically Gnome Atomic. KDE Atomic is called Kinoite, which is a word no one will say out loud correctly. They didn't bother coming up with wanky branding for Sway Atomic or Budgie Atomic.
They're really trying to channel Apple here, with Retina displays and Airport cards and Magic mice. And I'm trying to channel Tantacrul; as I'm typing my inner voice has adopted an Irish accent, and the next thing I'm going to say is my frustration at all of this makes me want to RAM AN ATOMIC SPIKE STRAIGHT THROUGH MY FACE! Okay, dial it back a bit...
Fedora's attempt at branding has made it difficult to understand what you're getting when you click on something on their website. There's a lot of Fedora-only branding like "spins" that I would get rid of, and go with something like "Fedora Gnome Workstation" "Fedora KDE Workstation" and then "Fedora Gnome Atomic" "Fedora KDE Atomic" etc. That would make it much easier and straightforward to shop.
Hahaha. Okay, yeah you laid it out brilliantly. Thank you for that! I can't but agree with you then. I hope some Fedora employee sees this @joojmachine@lemmy.ml. Apologies for the ping*.