Arch + gnome|kde against other distros

eDio · 2009-10-18 20:53:57

Arch for me is a perfect distro in that sense, that I know exactly, where all configuration is stored, what every file means and where to dig in case of problems.
But this is true only if I don't use major DEs, such as gnome or kde.

So I want to ask the community, what advantages and disadvantages Arch has against other distros with gnome/kde/etc (not counting rolling-release)?

TNX.

edit:
As for me, Arch's main advantage - simple configuration through text files. I guess it is the same for many Arch users. But not for all.
Why people, who prefer to use kde/gnome use Arch?

Last edited by eDio (2009-10-18 21:40:20)

Acecero · 2009-10-18 21:21:49

One advantage that Arch has, are how the packages are compiled to stay vanilla without any unneeded changes directly from upstream. The DEs would also run faster because they are i686 optimized compared to compiling them to lower x86 architectures that most distros use for 32 bit.

If you want to compare Arch to other distros, not just for the DEs, look here.

eDio · 2009-10-18 21:42:39

Thank you for your reply. I do want to compare just for DEs.

I have edited my 1st post a little.
The question I've asked is not significant for me. Just interesting.

lucke · 2009-10-18 22:03:32

It's the same for KDE or GNOME users - if anything in the system breaks, you can easily fix it, plus you get the latest.

raul_nds · 2009-10-18 22:04:25

I don't see why DE's ruin the ease of configuration. What's the difference of using KDE or Openbox in terms of the "Arch experience" (or whatever you want to call it)?

MP2E · 2009-10-18 22:36:35

I use ArchLinux with KDE4 because Arch gives me exactly what I want, no less, no more. KDE4 likes to be bloated and come with loads of useless crap, but not on Arch. Arch divides KDE into modules so I only get EXACTLY what i want. This makes my system fast, entirely customized, and yet it still looks good. Also if I want to remove KDE and install something else, it's extremely easy. Lastly, I love how standard Arch is. Packages are extremely standardized, none of this crap "flavoring"(as I like to call it) other distros employ, which cause more issues than they fix. Here everything is "standard linux". Everything conforms and makes sense, manual editing is simple. The AUR and PKGBUILD system is also absolutely fantastic, and probably my favorite part of the distro(along with tools like yaourt and the fact that most AUR packages also follow the Arch Packaging Standard)

rafaelgp · 2009-10-19 19:24:39

I use Arch with Gnome and the reason why I chose Arch was because:

a) Other distros comes with dozens of applications that I never use (games for example)
b) I only read good things about it.

The difference between Gnome in Arch linux and Gnome in XXX distro? The Wiki!

I have a long list of things I have to fix/ install in my spare time:

- Install Windows XP in Virtual box.
- Sync clock automatically at boot.
- Make printer work.
- And many more...

All that is in the Wiki and I will learn a lot reading about it.

Why use Gnome instead a minimalistic desktop (Openbox + Tint2 + trayer + feh...) Because I cannot justify the time it takes. I need to work, and Gnome has everything I need already built in.
I use Pekwm instead of Metacity. Apart from that, Gnome is fine for me.

celilo · 2009-10-20 02:11:25

deleted

Last edited by celilo (2009-10-20 02:12:09)

Arch Linux

#1 2009-10-18 20:53:57

Arch + gnome|kde against other distros

#2 2009-10-18 21:21:49

Re: Arch + gnome|kde against other distros

#3 2009-10-18 21:42:39

Re: Arch + gnome|kde against other distros

#4 2009-10-18 22:03:32

Re: Arch + gnome|kde against other distros

#5 2009-10-18 22:04:25

Re: Arch + gnome|kde against other distros

#6 2009-10-18 22:36:35

Re: Arch + gnome|kde against other distros

#7 2009-10-19 19:24:39

Re: Arch + gnome|kde against other distros

#8 2009-10-20 02:11:25

Re: Arch + gnome|kde against other distros

Board footer