Manjaro has some quirks that annoy me(no MST timezone, spotty support for my WD NVME), so I decided that since I'm not interested in any pre-configured graphical desktop of any kind, I should just dive into Arch, since it increasingly felt like that's what I was doing anyway but with Manjaro to dull the blow. So I did, and I am over the moon for doing so. Lots of gnashed teeth, but DDG indexes an answer to every question I've had, and it always makes sense when I find it. I've enjoyed having to dive into systemd in a much more low-level way than ever before-- to actually LEARN what it's doing, how, and why.

But one by one, I have been faced with some issue that I need to resolve, and one by one, I've knocked them off. The result now is the best work and gaming desktop I have ever used.

Arch is not for geniuses or wizards. Just patient people who are willing to read. The payoff is staggering, and many times over worth the effort.

  • 2
    excellently put and agree.

    since I've used linux I've learned way way more about a system than I ever did with Windows and MacOS.

    and as you move to more "manual" distros like arch, the learning increases a lot.

    just today, I've used the starbucks wifi and since I prefer using wpa_supplicant to NetworkManager, I ran the commands myself and learned via `dhclient -v` about DHCP messages.
  • 1
    I don't understand why some people consider arch people wizards. It requires some CLI basics (like piping and fundamental commands), and patience as you mentioned, but aside from that I don't feel like a crazy hacker.

    AFAIK, LinuxFromScratch is mentioned as harder.
  • 1

    Yeah, that's where like 90% of my searches led me.
  • 1

    Yeah, but it's not a contest to see who has the hardest time. I think Arch is terrific because it gives you enormous flexibility, leaving most of the choices to you. That means that I can customize it so heavily that anyone else would probably hate using my machine, and vice versa. But it works how I want.
Add Comment