Arch is actually perfect for new to Linux users as it teaches them Linux
Remember Windows and Apple are for the Fearful. Linux is for the Fearless.
5 Likes
Same here. Weāre also de-railing the topic so a split might be needed here before we carry on discussion, but Iām making my piece about it anyway; I cannot possibly see how itās more user-friendly to convince somebody they need to boot into a live session, connect online, install some utilities from a PPA, then expect them to run those utilities when if itās a boot error, itād simply be easier to tell people Donāt forget you can press the [Tab] key to autocomplete file paths. Please run lsblk -f. Please run cat /etc/fstab. Please [perform additional steps] until the problem is observed, triaged and resolved.
Like, systemd problems are systemd problems no matter what. I had someone in Linux Mint say their audio didnāt work, turned out pipewire.service was masked, and needed to be unmasked, reinstalled, then after reboot audio worked again. Thereās no way to make resolution like that easier regardless how easy the distro is.
1 Like
I know that. It was the first time I tried Arch too. I read somewhere on Archās site (I think) where it said that Arch is not for noobs. Not in those words, obviously, but still.
That being said, if Antergos didnāt make it so easy, my first Arch experience wouldāve been Borkjaroā¦ 
Thank Jeebus for Antergos, or Iād probably be using Ubuntu Studio or something. Maybe MX Linux. I really donāt know.
If your question is which distro Iād recommend to a Linux newbie, then my answer is Linux Mint, Zorin OS, or Pop!OS.
I think you are both missing a plain fact: Techies and people who love to solve/fix problems are a minority. People who are willing to stop complaining and go with the solution that they find inconvenient are a minority. People who actually read (like in general 
) are a minority.
Also, the idea that itād be easier to use the command line and read a wiki comes from not just you being in a minority, but also from your experience. You didnāt get up one day and decide that the seemingly inconvenient and technical thing is easier. I mean, unless you were logical at birth. 
Just remember that your experience can make something simple to you, while a lack of experience can make it complicated to others. And vice versa.
The reality is that we have lots of non-techie Linux newbies who use EndeavourOS quite happily. I even would guess that those users make up a substantial portion of our user base.
That being said, it isnāt for everyone. In particular, those who have no desire to explore or learn regardless of prior experience will probably not enjoy EndeavourOS in the long-term.
The problem is that terms like āNewbieā or āBeginnerā donāt really tell you anything interesting about a person.
6 Likes
if you use linux-lts or linux on live environment doesnt matherā¦some extention iso get testedā¦ on some point for newer kernel can help newer hardware also. i use linux-lts as backupā¦ if linux-zen gives errorā¦with bootctl changed default on that
I couldnāt care less if they do understand it. If somebody is requesting help and the other person obliges, it is up to them for interpreting the output and developing an action plan around that, the know-nothing novice on the other side is just an automaton who is submitting their body to you by doing as you say. If in the event you tell them what to do, they do it and the problem is resolved, yippee. If not, ah well you tried.
1 Like
Aside from this:
You make a good point. If someone new to Linux is willing to try, they are likely to stay. And for those persons, they are the ones who kinda need to be held onto like (insert funny analogy here).
So, Iād say, yes you tried, but sometimes a little more effort from us (the Linux community in general) is necessary. That person who is willing to leave Mac or M$ can bring others because they had a great first experience and started finding things to be simpler than they initially thought. They may also know how to explain things in easier ways to others considering a switch.
But I do get that helping anyone with most distros is a volunteer effort. I get that.
no i think you are Linux is the minority
Yeahā¦ Exactly.
What brought me to EndevourOS , was the latest kernel, with drivers for my PC.
And this is philosphy here - have the latest stuff and love it or hate it. We are the testers for latest kernel and software. We pay with troubleshooting in our own time for privillige of using cutting edge.
Community is centered around those principles. You should not adjust principles to potential community. This is not a client - company relation. If members of community donāt like this principles, they can change community, as there are many distros centered around stability.
Or just paru linux-lts 
5 Likes
I came from Debian Sid----because I wanted software that was bleeding-edge (and to leave the politics of Debian behind)ā¦I enjoy the occasional wrestle with software & the benefits outweigh the negatives in my mind (a scary place to be----for sure!).
My hardware is about 1 generation behind the latestā¦its cheaper that way & it keeps me close to current offerings (I sell my old hardware on eBay & buy new hardware just before the new generation comes out). So, using Linux or Linux-Zen is the option I wantā¦Iām really looking forward to 6.6 & 6.7 because of Intel Arc & BattleMage supportā¦
So, thatās my 2 cents worthā¦I DO keep the LTS kernel installedājust in caseā¦but Iāve not had very much need for it. If someone canāt use the latest kernelā¦just install LTS & let that āwork for themā.
Am I missing something here? I have always installed Endeavour and in the installer selected both the LTS, and Zen kernel in addition to the default AKA The Latest & Greatest", and had them in the grub boot menu, and now in the system-d boot menu all the same. I donāt use the LTS unless I canāt boot into the OS with the other two kernels: Itās a fallback for when there are problems with the OS, which are very rare.
Maybe itās not available in the offline installer, but it has been in the online one for as long as I can remember, and I have been using EOS since itās very beginning. I think thereās even a way to download and save it and other softwareās on any media it fits on and tell the installer to install it via a script just for that purpose, but thatās not something I have played with yet.
Also: as others pointed out, any distro based on Arch that installs the LTS kernel by default is defeating the whole purpose of a rolling release, and bound to break all kinds of stuff (Manjaro?), including the reason for their very existence in the first place: To have the newest bleeding edge OS and software!
Linux is a great OS, but just like changing from Windows to Mac, or dealing with any new OS, you canāt just install it and expect it to do exactly what you want the way you want, or exactly like whatever you have been using before. The many Linux distroās and models they are based on donāt exist to be all the same, but all different on purpose, to fit different people, with differing needs, but in the end you still can add to and subtract from any Linux distro to your hearts content for the most part.
It really helps to do your research before hand, before any endeavor (US English). Do you just buy a car first and then figure out what all it can do and how, or how it compares to your old ride, what features it has, and so much more?
I donāt think so, but if you do, who but yourself can you blame for not doing your homework first, most of which you can read in the main EOS website (just like with all other distros) before you even make the choice, read or watch reviews, comparisonsā¦ and preferably read up on Linux in general first and foremost, because thereās a lot to READ AND UNDERSTAND first, before even choosing any Linux distro.
The primary issue here is what kernel the ISO itself is using, not the installed system.
1 Like
āBorkjaroā! 
I donāt see the problem if you just stick it under advanced options.
The ISO doesnāt have submenus. It doesnāt support them currently.
Although, even if it did, it wouldnāt be very discoverable if stuffed in a submenu.
I think this all goes back to āwhat is the problem we are trying to solve here?ā.
Even if we had LTS as a boot option, we wouldnāt ship an ISO with a broken mainline kernelā¦
1 Like
OK, but at issue is also using the live media as if it were a complete system: Linux OSās including EOS can be installed to a removable disk as a complete system, and booted with whatever options the BIOS allows, and most can throw up a boot device choice automatically on every boot once you tell the BIOS to do it. And the live media does also have gparted on it and usable from the live media which is a wicked good partitioning/management software. So whoever complained about having to install one and dependencies must not know that, even though itās harder to miss than find.
I see absolutely no need for any other kernel in the ISO than the one it and especially the installer needs to work.
As for the āMemory issueā thatās a completely separate issue altogether, because even the latest greatest Arch kernel and most live environments can even run on a fancy IOT toaster with only a single core processor and 1GB of RAM, and in case itās not 64 bit yet, thereās an āArch 32ā being maintained for that specific purpose!
1 Like
TL;DR - Arch is not for new to Linux users. That is what Debian and/or Ubuntu is for.
without the years of experience I had using Ubuntu (et al.), Linux Mint, openSUSE, Antergos, etc. I would have a really hard time dealing with Arch-based systems
Probably not entirely relevant to the thread, but I can not resist the need to tell you that I could not for my life get into Ubuntu because of GNOME, the first distro that got me into Linux at all was Manjaro with KDE (all hail KDE), and only little more than half a year later I switched completely from daily driving Windows only to daily driving Linux only. It took only little more than half a year of daily driving first Manjaro then Parrot until I switched over to daily driving EndeavourOS since Decembre 2021 and I can not see myself changing distros unless some very drastic change happens to EnOS or the distro dies entirely.
The DE experience was a very subjective one, some like GNOME after coming from Windows, some are neutral to it, some, like me, canāt handle it, at least for a start. But I donāt think Iām that special for the Arch stream being my truly first and quickly my primary preferred flavour of Linux for desktop use. I have absolutely no idea what youāre talking about with Arch not being for new users.
Also, in the brief period I had struggled to use Ubuntu, I was also forced to use CLI to fix and accomplish certain things. So that is not a valid argument for or against Arch, as far as I can tell.
From what youāve said, the DE was the issue for you, so your points here are not really accurate.
Take this scenario as an example:
Imagine there was only Gnome (Oh Gawd - that scared me
) when you tried to switch.
Thatās all Iām going to say, really. What Iāve said before and what others have said above and in this thread covers my point.