Arch on Distrowatch

abhaysahai · 2006-07-07 06:03:43

Not Sure why Arch always manages to slip too low on Distrowatch.
The latest 7 Days page rank places Arch at 27th number, where as the stable 6 month places Arch at 20th.
I fail to understand why despite being one of the most Novel and enterprising distro, Arch fares so badly on Disto popularity.
It is no doubt the fastest Linux, in its default form. It is also extremly configurable, has almost every appplication, has AUR and on top of it has one of the best community.

It is similar to gentoo, with the added advantage that it has binary packages, still gentoo always figures much higher on Distrowatch.

allucid · 2006-07-07 06:39:27

Gentoo has a much larger userbase (chicken and egg problem) and also has detailed/complete/professional docuementation. Arch is very much "under the radar". The only reason I ever heard of it was when someone mentioned it in the Gentoo forums a while back.

iphitus · 2006-07-07 08:50:04

you cannot use the distrowatch stats as a measure of distro popularity, using them as such is fundamentally flawed, as they are affected by greater factors than who uses the distro.

James

deficite · 2006-07-07 09:32:11

Actually, I consider Arch to be at a pretty high rank already. Why doesn't Arch have a higher ranking than it does right now? I guess it's how knowledgable Arch users tend to be. People who don't know much about Linux will flood forums with stuff like "OMFG FEDORA IS TEH BEST!!!!!!!!!!" Arch users know enough to praise and support the distro without falling to n00bish fanboism. Those n00b fanboys are n00b fanboy magnets and end up attracting more n00b fanboys that will constantly vote for their distro and flood every board on the internet with their distro. Even forums not related to Linux.

user · 2006-07-07 09:56:14

Dude, it doesn't matter.
i will be happier if arch ported into IBM CELL or powerpc64 or opensparc ( http://www.power.org http://opensparc.sunsource.net/nonav/index.html )next year..

iphitus · 2006-07-07 10:16:02

user wrote:

Dude, it doesn't matter.
i will be happier if arch ported into IBM CELL or powerpc64 or opensparc ( http://www.power.org http://opensparc.sunsource.net/nonav/index.html )next year..

if you want it so much, how about you shout the developer team a set of cell based computers, and some sparcs too. Otherwise, you havnt got a chance in the world of it happening

Moo-Crumpus · 2006-07-07 11:16:25

I think it is the rolling releases. As Arch is "just" arch there is no "Ah - Arch 2006 is released, adds feature this and that" hype, so no one is fed.

Mr Green · 2006-07-07 11:18:58

If we were at the top of the list, we would be among the likes of Ubuntu :cry:

No Thanks

Command Line :?

McQueen · 2006-07-07 12:04:56

Many of the distros which are ranked higher do a lot more to publicize their particular brand. Arch is _very_ highly regarded among people who know their wares in the Linux community, but it does not get the degree of press which would give a strengthened upfront awareness outside the in-house group types. Nor does it have a lot of the 'shiny objects' that attracts many people to certain distros these days.

magnum_opus · 2006-07-07 12:22:26

yeah but its like 27 out of threehundred bazillion its still pretty good, plus of those ranked higher than arch three of them are *buntus one is pure debian and one is knoppix, four are slackwares and the top five are ubuntu suse fedore mepis and mandriva, how the hell do you compete with those guys

user · 2006-07-07 12:22:42

iphitus wrote:

user wrote:
Dude, it doesn't matter.
i will be happier if arch ported into IBM CELL or powerpc64 or opensparc ( http://www.power.org http://opensparc.sunsource.net/nonav/index.html )next year..
if you want it so much, how about you shout the developer team a set of cell based computers, and some sparcs too. Otherwise, you havnt got a chance in the world of it happening

No i am shouting YOU..

Moo-Crumpus · 2006-07-07 12:29:27

.... and in the end I don't really care for distrowatch.
'Me runs the biggest' and that stuff is not my game.

patroclo7 · 2006-07-07 13:11:53

There are two reasons why "small is better" can be applied to arch:
1) it is easier to organize the community and to avoid absurd flames;
2) the simple user is allowed to contribute actively also in crtain aspects of the development: this is an essential feature in any open source project and I really think that the AUR is one of the most advanced examples of this approach. However, I really do not know if somethink like AUR would be conceivable if Arch had as many users as ubuntu or gentoo...

Therefore, Arch should be popular only in the sense of having an active community, not a big one: but distrowatch can not measure the first parameter; on the contrary just a look to this forum shows how active-popular arch is!

abhaysahai · 2006-07-07 13:12:19

Looks like Arch needs some advertizing. All my friends are happy using Fedora/Ubuntu, but will not even talk about Arch. Its good that Arch is one of the best distro, but having a handbook - a step by step procedure from install to a fully functional KDE would be much helpful in further adoption of Arch.

Still, I know, I can never drift from Arch.

battra · 2006-07-07 15:20:06

Agree with abhaysahai, it's advertising/marketing and documentation/handbook. Gentoo, for example, has a sexier website and great documentation both of which are more inviting to newbies.

I don't think the command-line or base install is the problem. Gentoo soared in popularity despite their long command-based installation procedure. The command-line can actually be an advantage if it enhances the "cool" or "geek" factor for a distro. This has also happened to Gentoo.

mingfal · 2006-07-07 15:38:43

Not everyone knows arch,but almost everyone who knows arch loves arch.
Don't care about the rank.We all love it,that's enough.

deficite · 2006-07-07 15:48:54

user wrote:

Dude, it doesn't matter.
i will be happier if arch ported into IBM CELL or powerpc64 or opensparc ( http://www.power.org http://opensparc.sunsource.net/nonav/index.html )next year..

CELL? You want Arch ported to CELL? AMD64 is understandable......powerpc was understandable considering the sheer number of mac users at the time. CELL? Wow, of all things to want Arch to do. I hope you have fun developing it and maintaining it by yourself.

kth5 · 2006-07-07 16:02:51

deficite wrote:

user wrote:
Dude, it doesn't matter.
i will be happier if arch ported into IBM CELL or powerpc64 or opensparc ( http://www.power.org http://opensparc.sunsource.net/nonav/index.html )next year..
CELL? You want Arch ported to CELL? AMD64 is understandable......powerpc was understandable considering the sheer number of mac users at the time. CELL? Wow, of all things to want Arch to do. I hope you have fun developing it and maintaining it by yourself.

as far as the IBM guys told me what Cell is about, i do not believe they will ever be used as general purpose CPUs just because they're highly optimized on doing mathematical operations such as used for 3D graphics only. why would i want to run a desktop on such an architecture?

an as a matter of fact i have confirmed that archppc runs on POWER5 and G5 just fine. no problems with it whatsoever. a 64bit userland doesn't improve perfomance as much as anyone thinks, so i do not believe it's worth it.

iphitus · 2006-07-07 16:13:36

you could just run the PPC port on a cell couldnt you kth5?

user · 2006-07-07 16:17:04

weird me, but to me x86 is more stranger than CELL..

PS: may be it just like japan-manga is different from dilbert or batman(american-cartoon)?

kth5 · 2006-07-07 16:20:34

iphitus wrote:

you could just run the PPC port on a cell couldnt you kth5?

in fact you can't. although this is getting a bit OT...

Cell uses PowerPC technology as a core but major parts in it that altogether make the Cell are not. meaning you have to specifically port software to make use of this cpu.

Kern · 2006-07-07 16:29:15

Why Arch figures so low on Distrowatch

arch doesnt trumpet every nth degree update, publish every recent change in its wiki, announce the last time judd scratched his arse etc etc as most other distros do to keep on the first page of D'watch.

and most shoppers only check the top 10 / top 20 on any chart.

i dont give a hoot how far up or down it is. i found it, and it rocks, as does the community support.

Go Arch !

<otherdistro> = top10 ? : 20,000,000,000,000,000,000 flies cant be wrong, lets all eat shit. NOT

T-Dawg · 2006-07-07 19:27:55

Arch is too difficult for most users I think. Take a look at the most popular distros, Suse, Redhat/Fedora, Mandriva, Ubuntu they all pretty much hold your hand through the install process. Gentoo is the only one in the top ten thats more difficult to install.

Dusty · 2006-07-07 19:36:08

What are you talking about? Arch is too popular. Already I have to browse through not one, but *two* pages of unread posts every day. I want the good ol' days back where I knew every single poster and read every single post.

And there were lots of stupid questions repeated because there was no documentation.....

Dusty

soloport · 2006-07-07 20:30:03

Dusty wrote:

What are you talking about? Arch is too popular. Already I have to browse through not one, but *two* pages of unread posts every day. I want the good ol' days back where I knew every single poster and read every single post.
And there were lots of stupid questions repeated because there was no documentation.....
Dusty

Fine, I'll just quietly go away. May the rest follow...

Arch Linux

#1 2006-07-07 06:03:43

Arch on Distrowatch

#2 2006-07-07 06:39:27

Re: Arch on Distrowatch

#3 2006-07-07 08:50:04

Re: Arch on Distrowatch

#4 2006-07-07 09:32:11

Re: Arch on Distrowatch

#5 2006-07-07 09:56:14

Re: Arch on Distrowatch

#6 2006-07-07 10:16:02

Re: Arch on Distrowatch

#7 2006-07-07 11:16:25

Re: Arch on Distrowatch

#8 2006-07-07 11:18:58

Re: Arch on Distrowatch

#9 2006-07-07 12:04:56

Re: Arch on Distrowatch

#10 2006-07-07 12:22:26

Re: Arch on Distrowatch

#11 2006-07-07 12:22:42

Re: Arch on Distrowatch

#12 2006-07-07 12:29:27

Re: Arch on Distrowatch

#13 2006-07-07 13:11:53

Re: Arch on Distrowatch

#14 2006-07-07 13:12:19

Re: Arch on Distrowatch

#15 2006-07-07 15:20:06

Re: Arch on Distrowatch

#16 2006-07-07 15:38:43

Re: Arch on Distrowatch

#17 2006-07-07 15:48:54

Re: Arch on Distrowatch

#18 2006-07-07 16:02:51

Re: Arch on Distrowatch

#19 2006-07-07 16:13:36

Re: Arch on Distrowatch

#20 2006-07-07 16:17:04

Re: Arch on Distrowatch

#21 2006-07-07 16:20:34

Re: Arch on Distrowatch

#22 2006-07-07 16:29:15

Re: Arch on Distrowatch

#23 2006-07-07 19:27:55

Re: Arch on Distrowatch

#24 2006-07-07 19:36:08

Re: Arch on Distrowatch

#25 2006-07-07 20:30:03

Re: Arch on Distrowatch

Board footer