Comment on Screw it, I’m installing Linux

• Holytimes@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨hour⁩ ago

  Cachy is a better starting point then Manjaro. Manjaro gets funky.

  source
• rumba@lemmy.zip ⁨7⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  Honestly, Day 1’ers, I’d rather they run Debian, Mint, Ubuntu, or Fedora. There are strong communities that are noob friendly. Go ahead and install Steam, get some games working, get their feet wet. 99% of the time, they don’t need more than basic stuff. Once they’re over being afraid of not being in windows, then start distro hopping to whatever they want.

  source

  • jjlinux@lemmy.zip ⁨4⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    This is exactly right. It’s a journey, not a race.

    source
  • cows_are_underrated@feddit.org ⁨6⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    I can really suggest Mint for beginners simply because it has an UI for about everything you need somewhat regularly. This means, that you can use GUIs to get familiar and aren’t forced to know your way around the terminal. Its the Ideal beginner Distros (at least from my experience)

    source
  • ripcord@lemmy.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    KDE Neon ftw

    source
• sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works ⁨5⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  I disagree. If you want to use Arch for the first time, install it the Arch way. It’s going to be hard, and that’s the point. Arch will need manual intervention at some point, and you’ll be expected to fix it.

  If you use something like Manjaro or CachyOS, you’ll look up commands online and maybe it’ll work, but it might not. There’s a decent chance you’ll break something, and you’ll get mad.

  Arch expects you to take responsibility for your system, and going through the official install process shows you can do that. Once you get through that once, go ahead and use an installer or fork. You know where to find documentation when something inevitably breaks, so you’re good to go.

  If you’re unwilling to do the Arch install process but still want a rolling release, consider OpenSUSE Tumbleweed. It’s the trunk for several projects, some of them commercial, so you’re getting a lot of professional eyeballs on it. There’s a test suite any change needs to pass, and I’ve seen plenty of cases where they hold off on a change because a test fails. And when it does fail (and it probably will), you just snapper rollback and wait a few days. The community isn’t as big as other distros, so I don’t recommend it for a first distro, but they’re also not nearly as impatient as Arch forums.

  Arch is a great distro, I used it for a few years without any major issues, but I did need to intervene several times. I’ve been on Tumbleweed about as long and I’ve only had to snapper rollback a few times, and that was the extent of the intervention.

  source

  • starblursd@lemmy.zip ⁨4⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    I agree… I went with arch because I like rolling release but wanted to force myself to learn how things work. Anymore, arch has just as much chance of breaking as any other distro, fairly low honestly. It does however have the most detailed documentation and resources available.

    Now on CachyOs cause it’s quicker to setup and the team behind it is so damn on top of getting issues fixed asap.

    source

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨hour⁩ ago

      Yes, Arch is really stable and has been for about 10 years. In fact, I started using Arch just before they became really stable (the /usr merge), and stuck with it for a few years after. It’s a fantastic distro! If openSUSE Tumbleweed stopped working for me, I’d probably go back to Arch. I ran it on multiple systems, and my main reason for switching is I wanted something with a stable release cycle for servers and rolling on desktop so I can use the same tools on both.

      It has fantastic documentation, true, but most likely a new user isn’t going to go there, they’ll go to a forum post from a year ago and change something important. The whole point of going through the Arch install process is to force you to get familiar with the documentation. It’s really not that hard, and after the first install (which took a couple hours), the second took like 20 min. I learned far more in that initial install than I did in the 3-ish years I’d used other distros before trying Arch.

      CachyOS being easy to setup defeats the whole purpose since users won’t get familiar with the wiki. By all means, go install CachyOS immediately after the Arch install, buy so yourself a favor and go through it. You’ll understand everything from the boot process to managing system services so much better.

      source
  • jjlinux@lemmy.zip ⁨4⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    Yeah, there are many people that just want the system to work and not have to become full time geeks like some of us are. There are also plenty of distros, atomic or not, that provide that experience. Perfect match. There’s a distro for everyone, from anti-tech people to full blown rocket scientists.

    source

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨hour⁩ ago

      I 100% agree. If you want the Arch experience, you should have the full Arch experience IMO, and that includes the installation process. I don’t mean this in a gatekeepy way, I just mean that’s the target audience and that’s what the distro is expecting.

      For a new user, I just cannot recommend Arch because, chances are, that’s not what they actually want. Most new users want to customize stuff, and you can do that with pretty much every distro.

      For new users, I recommend Debian, Mint, or Fedora. They’re release based, which is what you want when starting out so stuff doesn’t change on you, and they have vibrant communities. After using it for a year or two, you’ll figure out what you don’t like about the distro and can pick something else.

      source