Why do you use Arch

cryptearth · 2024-06-23 20:14:32

Only ever tried and used two distributions: opensuse and arch.
opensuse: first linux I ever came in contact with - just stuck to it
arch: friend of mine use(d) it for a long time when I switched from windows to linux - just followed him as opensuse is stuck way too far in the past (even most recent version is stuck on a 5.x kernel) and a 2.34 glibc

Bingo76 · 2024-06-28 21:41:16

Saw a friend using it, tried other distros but found them hard to use, switched to endeavor and found it easy to use, switched from endeavor to arch and never looked back.

shreyyoo · 2024-06-30 13:32:45

I wanted to use the system which was the most cult-popular, and was the fastest in performance. Then I came across the famous "I use Arch BTW" flex on discord. Afterwards I searched more about Arch, and slowly started to realize the drawbacks of Ubuntu.
It took a lot of distro-hopping for me to finally land onto Arch, and now I feel at home.

llionesista · 2024-07-06 18:08:22

I've been using Arch for a year now, basic install with nothing from aur. I haven't had any problem in all this time, so now that in summer I have more free time, I will start to try services like snapper, secureboot,...to entertain myself a bit and learn with Arch, because it is an ideal distribution for that, without added bloatware or personal configurations and predefined by other distributions. In Arch I have managed to have installed only what I use and need, not what others want me to have installed, that's why I use Arch, because I like minimalism. My Arch installation boots in 15 seconds. My previous distro booted in 40 seconds. That's the main reason why I use Arch.

Nikolai5 · 2024-07-06 19:57:49

I was a long-time Linux Mint user, what pushed to me to move to Arch was two things:

Firstly I got new hardware for gaming and I needed up to date kernel and software to run it and Mint's LTEness wasn't up for that, I would have had to install much of it manually myself vs in Arch just using what is the repo ready to go.

Secondly was I was getting tired of having packges, app images, flatpaks and so on to combat an IMO out of date repo. I love Debian but many of the packages are so out of date that "stable" isn't quite the word I would use.
With Arch every piece of software is controlled by Pacman and anything that isn't in the repo I use the build system with AUR to create a package that Pacman can use. I've never been a fan of flatpaks, snaps or anything like that and Arch unlike other distros allows me to easily have everything under the one package manager.

If you would follow up with: "Why use Arch over ready-made Arch-based distros?" I'd counter with "why?". They offer literally nothing I can't do in Arch and some of them are plainly worse. I tried Manjaro and am immediately confronted with instability, inane decision making and even they contradict themselves as to the point of their distro, advertising it as user friendly in one place and then in others suggesting beginners stay away.

If you're going to use Arch, use the real Arch.

But yeah, I've found Arch to be easy to use (thanks in great part to the wiki), very up to date, meaning I don't need to rely on app images, flatpaks, etc and perfect for both work and play. If I had to pick another distro I'd maybe try Gentoo, I do still have a love for Debian and Linux Mint and would use them again, but beyond Arch, Debian, LM and Gentoo I've no interest in going to a gimmick distro. People distro hop because they try out these daft "gaming distros" and what not.

galegovski · 2024-07-20 03:35:20

I was a Debian user and I didn't like being so far behind with the packages, because for a server it's fine, but on the desktop it's not pleasant. So I switched to Ubuntu. But about three years ago I installed Arch Linux after being disappointed by the imposition of Snap packages on Ubuntu.

At first I thought the system would break a lot and I would have difficulties, but what I found was a more stable system than Ubuntu, and one that is easier to configure without breaking. It's also great to always have the latest software.

Switching to Arch Linux was the best decision I've ever made when it comes to operating systems.

Head_on_a_Stick · 2024-07-20 16:36:45

There are only a few distributions I would even consider:

Arch
Debian
Alpine

I use Debian on the family laptops because it's maintenance free but I use Arch on my laptop because it has the latest packages and it releases them in step, unlike Debian sid. I would love to use Alpine on my laptop because it's so much simpler than Arch but it won't run Proton games, which I need.

Both Debian and Alpine are "lighter" than Arch, significantly so in the case of Alpine, but I do prefer Arch's lack of abstractions compared to Debian. I'm quite annoyed that PKGBUILDs use bash (APKBUILDs use POSIX sh, which I prefer) and that /bin/sh is linked to bash rather than (for example) dash but both are in keeping with the generally bloated nature of Arch.

chuudoku · 2024-07-29 23:07:51

I originally used Arch because I wanted to challenge myself to see if I could install it, bragging rights, etc.,

I now use Arch because it's been the most stable experience I've ever had on any Linux distribution other than Fedora (which I still use on my work machine). Other than the random hiccup, I've never had any stability issues that have led me to reinstall a system.

kur0na_ · 2024-08-03 11:55:06

I use arch because I like the freedom of customizing aspects of my system.

ImNamo · 2024-08-12 20:08:29

I wanted to try something new and use arch as a personal challenge to myself

Fisnick · 2024-09-14 14:20:06

Funny thing, Arch actually runs so well on my PC.
I've tried other distros, and they all had issues with applications or my hardware, but Arch has worked for everything and have not had one big hiccup (I'm 4 days in with lots of usage).

Everything just seems to work so well and honestly, I was expecting it to not...

lune · 2024-11-04 14:26:58

I started my Linux journey with Kubuntu. Used it for a week or so but I had issues (that I could've probably fixed with my current knowledge). I then discovered EndeavourOS, and used that. I loved it and still do, I think it's Manjaro done right. Slapped the KDE desktop on EndeavourOS and lo and behold I got an extremely satisfying, fast and smooth desktop experience. That moment I was sold on Arch.

I unfortunately was too unwise to know about ProtonPlus and Lutris to get a non-Steam game working (adding as a non-steam game didn't work fsr) and a program I was using didn't function (it does now), so I went back to Windows. I used that unpleasant OS until I started getting tired of all the AI slop they keep putting in it, and especially recently when the privacy-invading mess that Recall is, was announced. At that point, I was done, it was the last straw. I went back to EndeavourOS.

One day I decided to experiment with installing Arch myself in a VM. Did it a couple times to ensure I knew how to do it. Then I said screw it and put it on my main rig.

It was painless. It was fun. I had only what I needed and nothing more. It feels peaceful. All my hardware is detected and functioning properly, even my bluetooth Keychron keyboard that had issues on Mint.

I think I am cursed (or blursed?) to only use Arch. The sheer size and convenience of the AUR, pacman, the new packages, rolling release model, my hardware just working... this OS is the one that's not recommended as a "it just works OS" by most people, but that's exactly what it is for me. If I rarely have an issue, 99% of the time it's self inflicted, and the other 1% of the time it's easily resolvable by consulting the Wiki for 5 minutes, or installing something I need that is most definitely present on the AUR.

I tried dualbooting other distros like Mint as I've specified, to see if I ever could use one of them, if something were to happen to Arch or if I got tired of maintaining it (which is really not hard to do, update once a week, or once a month at worst.) The result? I stopped trying. Mint was very close, but none satisfied me as much as Arch does.

So I'm here to stay, for as long as it'll carry me. Floating around 1200 packages and using Radeon GPU, I shouldn't have too many issues with stability - if any. Arch has been surprisingly stable. Worst case scenario I go to Mint, but I don't see myself abandoning Arch at all.

Last edited by lune (2024-11-04 17:16:02)

Arch Linux

#26 2024-06-23 20:14:32

Re: Why do you use Arch

#27 2024-06-28 21:41:16

Re: Why do you use Arch

#28 2024-06-30 13:32:45

Re: Why do you use Arch

#29 2024-07-06 18:08:22

Re: Why do you use Arch

#30 2024-07-06 19:57:49

Re: Why do you use Arch

#31 2024-07-20 03:35:20

Re: Why do you use Arch

#32 2024-07-20 16:36:45

Re: Why do you use Arch

#33 2024-07-29 23:07:51

Re: Why do you use Arch

#34 2024-08-03 11:55:06

Re: Why do you use Arch

#35 2024-08-12 20:08:29

Re: Why do you use Arch

#36 2024-09-14 14:20:06

Re: Why do you use Arch

#37 2024-11-04 14:26:58

Re: Why do you use Arch

Board footer