You are not logged in.
Congrats everyone! http://www.linuxvoice.com/linux-distros/.
We were looking for a distro that performs well in every area, and excellently in many, making it a good all-round distro. However this alone isn’t enough. It needs to have something that pushes it ahead of the competition – and the competition is getting better every year. It needs that certain X factor to make it stand out. It should be a distro people want to install; a distro that people get passionate about; a distro that makes you remember why you love Linux.
Arch Linux does all this and more. The two things that make it stand out aren’t fancy bits of software, or slick user interfaces, but its philosophy and its community.
Last edited by link (2014-10-09 05:31:52)
Offline
That's it, I'm moving to Arch.
-edit-
Arch was already the best many moons ago. https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch_is_the_best
Last edited by lucke (2014-10-09 05:48:03)
Offline
The two things that make it stand out aren’t fancy bits of software, or slick user interfaces, but its philosophy and its community.
peow peow!
Offline
I've heard that the Arch community is elitist and hostile. Is that what makes it stand out? ;-)
Offline
2015 will be the Year of the Arch Linux Desktop!
Offline
They compare the RAM usage of arch running KDE to Lubuntu running LXDE. What where they thinking? "This article needs some benchmarks with colorful charts to make it look technical."
Offline
They compare the RAM usage of arch running KDE to Lubuntu running LXDE. What where they thinking? "This article needs some benchmarks with colorful charts to make it look technical."
And how the heck did they get those figures? Like those figures look way off. When I boot MATE w/Compiz on Arch, there's about 190MB RAM used on boot and Plasma 5 boots up with 500MB on boot at most (actually, I can whittle it down, but I can't be bothered to right now). And those Ubuntu 14.04 memory figures just look way off.
Claire is fine.
Problems? I have dysgraphia, so clear and concise please.
My public GPG key for package signing
My x86_64 package repository
Offline
The moment I started reading this I knew exactly which distro would win. Only good things to say about arch. I actually had my first problem that prevented properly booting this week, and it was because I'm an idiot and did a huge pacman -Syu without reading the homepage. Fixed it with elinks and the wiki.
People on slashdot are engaging in the predictable systemd bashing in response to this article.
I was also surprised by the use of KDE as the desktop of choice for Arch. I would like to see those benchmarks with AwesomeWM or Openbox.
Offline
As an Arch user, my self-worth just skyrocketed. I'll be sure to include it in my epitaph now.
"Here lies some guy
Who decided to just up and die.
But while he lived, he made a good choice
And used the distro voted 'best' by Linux Voice."
Last edited by jakobcreutzfeldt (2014-10-10 14:55:31)
Offline
And on my resume too!
Five years experience maintaining THE BEST LINUX DISTRIBUTION
Offline
Well done!
Offline
I've heard that the Arch community is elitist and hostile. Is that what makes it stand out? ;-)
stfu noob
And how the heck did they get those figures? Like those figures look way off. When I boot MATE w/Compiz on Arch, there's about 190MB RAM used on boot and Plasma 5 boots up with 500MB on boot at most (actually, I can whittle it down, but I can't be bothered to right now). And those Ubuntu 14.04 memory figures just look way off.
From what I could gather, the entire thought process was probably "This is a technical article, therefore diagrams. QED". Whoops, that's the elitism speaking…
Offline
I've been using the Best Linux distro out there this whole time? Well blow me down.
I may have to CONSOLE you about your usage of ridiculously easy graphical interfaces...
Look ma, no mouse.
Offline
http://distrowatch.com/weekly.php?issue … 3#comments (emphasis mine)
Arch and the mountain climbing metaphor (by Microlinux on 2014-10-13 09:36:21 GMT from France)
"Just as a mountain climber becomes one with the raw mountain in order to climb it without technical assistance, and a surfer needs just a carved plank to harness the power of a wave, so a computer user needs just the basic tools that Arch Linux provides to get the most out of their system."I'm not only a Linux user, but also a hobby climber, and the above statement made me cringe for a few reasons.
1. Climbing usually requires technical assistance in the form of a harness, a rope, carabiners and quickdraws. Leave these out, and your life expectancy decreases drastically.
2. I like it when my raw mountain is not a moving target.
:o)
LOOOOOOOOOL!
Offline
The climbing metaphor is great, touches the essence of Arch. How Arch won, the criteria of Linuxvoice is brilliant.
http://www.linuxvoice.com/linux-distros/
Thank you to all the devs and users who brought Arch to receive such fantastic Linux/public recognition.
That said, we think that Linux users should try Arch at least once. Even if you don’t fall in love with the distro, you’ll learn a lot about how Linux works, and get a better understanding of why other distros do the things they do. It’s not just for super-geeks – it’s a distro for the masses.
Markku
Offline
From the same DistroWatch page karol quoted from:
Before one can answer what is the best distro, they have to answer for what purpose! While Arch is a great linux distribution, it isn't the one I would want to install and support on a 100 workstations in a business or classroom environment, or even my mother's computer. I probably wouldn't use it for a mission critical server role and it's also not one I would use for embed systems work.
There's a saying that learn Ubuntu and you learn Ubuntu, learn Arch and you learn Linux. Well, most users don't want or need to learn Linux (or Ubuntu).
"Best Distro" declarations are worthless. Instead they need to be "Best Distro For..." declarations. Arch is an excellent distribution, but as most people will tell you, it's not for the feint of heart. For general use, particularly in a business setting, openSuse would seem to be a better choice. For general use as a home desktop, one might look at one of the *buntus. For development work, particularly in the US, fedora, RHEL or CENTOS seems a good choice.
The reality is that from the user perspective, one can make any distro look and act like any other. The question as to what is best really comes down to how much work is involved to make it actually do that.
Again, Arch is an excellent distro. But depending on your use case, it might not be the best distro.
Fair points all (except for the "development work" bit), but since the whole article was a comparison of rolling-release operating systems, why single out Arch? Why bother even commenting? Using a rolling-release OS when you want a static setup is foolish, no matter what the distribution is.
Offline
Arch setup and configuration may not be the easiest, but in my experience Arch has been more stable than ubuntu/debian based distros. Probably because both Arch and my use case promote minimalism, less to go wrong.
Offline
You should frequent other Arch related websites, stozi. Visit /r/archlinux on reddit.com, if you want to learn more about the relation between "stable system" and "competent user".
Offline