Also why does everyone seem to hate on Ubuntu?

  • folaht@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    57 minutes ago

    Arch is better because…

    • pacman, seriously, I don’t hear enough of how great pacman is.
      Being able to search easily for files within a package is a godsend when some app refuses to work giving you an error message “lib_obscure.so.1 cannot be found”.
      I haven’t had such issues in a long time, but when I do, I don’t have to worry about doing a ten hour search, if I’m lucky, for where this obscure library file is supposed to be located and in what package it should be part of.
    • rolling release. Non-rolling Ubuntu half-year releases have broken my OS in the past around 33% of the time. And lots of apps in the past had essential updates I needed, but required me to wait 5 months for the OS to catch up.
    • AUR. Some apps can’t be found anywhere but AUR.
    • Their wiki is the best of all Linuxes

    The “cult” is mostly gushing over AUR.

  • Yozul@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    4 hours ago

    Normal people who use Arch don’t bring it up much, because they’re all sick of the memes and are really, REALLY tired of immediately being called rude elitist neckbeard cultists every time they mention it.

    The Ubuntu hate is because Canonical has a long history of making weird, controversial decisions that split the Linux community for no good reason.

        • folaht@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 hours ago

          Unity would be the first example, and although Unity was actually a good DE,
          it was too bloated and almost non-modifiable.

          People jumped ship to Linux Mint that had its priorities straight.

          Mir and Snap were bigger issues though
          as Wayland and Flatpak were great replacements for
          X11 and AppImage and did not need another competitor.

          But the privacy issues were the straw that broke the camel’s back.
          People left windows for linux so they wouldn’t have to deal with this kind of nonsense.

          I actually jumped when Ubuntu jumped to Gnome 3.
          Gnome 3 was too bloated for me and it looked ugly.

          I decided to see what Arch Linux was about
          and eventually settled for Manjaro Linux.
          Arch + Xfce for the win.

  • glitching@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 hours ago

    because they used to be special. “I run linux”, matrix text on boot, typing shit in the terminal, “I’m in”, awe-inspiring shit to an onlooker…

    but nowadays, anyone can run ubuntu or mint or whatevs and our hero ain’t special no more. so here comes the ultimate delimiter.

  • NewOldGuard [he/him, they/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 hours ago

    Arch is amazing for what it is, hence the love. It’s what you make of it; by default there’s nothing and you design your own system from scratch. This leads to a very passionate and enthusiastic community who do great work for one another, for everybody’s benefit. Anything under the sun can be found in the AUR, the distro repos are fresh and reliable, and every issue that arises has a hundred people documenting the fix before it’s patched.

    Ubuntu has a bad reputation for inconsistency, privacy invasive choices, etc. I don’t think all the hate is deserved, as they corrected course after the Amazon search fiasco, but I still won’t use it because of Snaps. They have a proprietary backend, so even if I wanted to put up with their other strange design decisions I can’t unless I wanted closed source repos. That goes against my whole philosophy and reasoning for being on Linux to begin with, and many feel the same.

  • Luffy@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Arch Hits the great spot

    It has:

    • a great wiki
    • many packages, enough for anything you want to do
    • its the only distros that is beetween everything done for you and gentoo-like fuck you.
    • and the Memes.
  • hankthetankie [none/use name]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    4 hours ago

    I’m quite experienced in Linux but I wouldn’t use either. Arch is great if you like to tinker, Ubuntu sucks for the not so libre approach , corporate ties, telemetry etc. I distrohopped before but today I just install my debian based distro and shit works… Ubuntu I’ve installed twice before when I was new to Linux, and have had a major issues every time due to official updates that broke internet drivers and other things, that’s a fun one when you only have one PC . Not to mention its so bloated that shitty computers that I like to thinker with it have a hard time catching up. The arch thing is also mostly a kind of meme, targeting the more unbearable nerds. People I hated when I was a noob (they will let you know you are) But they are found everywhere and in general I don’t think there’s more of those people in arch community than anywhere else. It’s more of a stab at elitism than arch specifically.

    I see a point in arch but zero in ubuntu.

  • juipeltje@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 hours ago

    I feel like it isn’t really specific to arch, every distro has a following, but some are more “passionate” about it than others. I think arch, NixOS, and gentoo are the most notable.

  • m532@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    5 hours ago

    When I got fed up with windows 8.1 (and windows update bricked it), I first used ubuntu. How well or not it worked depended on the version. In version 19 it got some ugly white message boxes. I searched for how to change their color and found an angry dev saying no you cant change that. This was the final bullshit. Then I switched to arch, which lets me choose how my stuff looks and doesn’t have the whole 3/4 versions are buggy thing. It works and ubuntu does not.

  • sudo@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 hours ago

    About 10 years ago it was The Distro for first time linux users to prove they were a True Linux Enjoyer. Think a bunch of channers bragging about how they are the true linux master race because they edited a grub config.

    Before Arch that role belonged to Gentoo. Since then that role has transitioned to NixOS who aren’t nearly as toxic but still culty. “Way of the future” etc.

    All three of have high bars of entry so everyone has to take pride in the effort they put in to learn how to install their distro. Like getting hazed into a frat except you actually learn something.

    The Ubuntu hatred is completely unrelated. That has to do with them being a corporate distro that keep making bad design decisions. And their ubiquity means everyone has to deal with their bad decisions. (snap bad)

    • MimicJar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Before Arch that role belonged to Gentoo.

      To add, before the change the Gentoo wiki was a top resource when it came to Linux questions. Even if you didn’t use Gentoo you could find detailed information on how various parts of Linux worked.

      One day the Gentoo wiki died. It got temporary mirrors quickly, but it took a long time to get up and working again. This left a huge opening for another wiki, the Arch wiki, to become the new top resource.

      I suspect, for a number of reasons, Arch was always going to replace Gentoo as the “True Linux Explorer”, but the wiki outage accelerated it.

    • NotSteve_@piefed.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      8 hours ago

      This is it mostly for sure. I used to be that True Linux Enjoyer. I still install arch sometimes but I only ever use an arch-derived distribution now that comes with an installer. I already feel like there’s not enough time in the day without having to manually copy files off a USB stick

      • exu@feditown.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        None of the usual installers can do what I want unfortunately, so I’m stuck doing it myself.

  • lordnikon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    7 hours ago

    People that got into Linux when most of the main distributions were easier to install than windows in most cases. Some people wanted to show off that they can install a Linux like it was when we did it back in the 90s for some reason I still don’t understand till this day. I do like their wiki though. Works great for debian as well as arch.

    • downhomechunk@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 hours ago

      I’ve been a slackware user since the late 90s. I take for granted how easy it is to install today. I’ve been tinkering with a socket 7 build, and nothing is easy. Installing slackware 8 is a pain in the ass. I can’t even get half my hardware working on win95! It’s not like riding a bicycle.

    • deafboy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      24 minutes ago

      For real. The new logo was the reason I switched back then. It was a tough experience, but worth it.