Interesting reactions to my Endeavour writeup

So I decided to see where my “kinder genlter terminal” idea might go in a review/info post about Endeavour, and outside of some overly negative posts the responses have been extremely positive. A couple of people seem to have realized “terminal centric” isn’t as bad as it seems…one person realized that “easy” doesn’t mean “hides the terminal” and decided EOS wasn’t for them, but even that was a reasonably positive response. So much positivity on Reddit is almost scary. :slight_smile:

EDIT: the preview is showing up in German for me…

5 Likes

I’m downvoting all of this Kruug guys posts :rofl:.
That person seems like a true “Arch btw” personality

3 Likes

Just 2 small little nitpicks. packseek is not a GUI package manager, but rather called a TUI, terminal user interface, so just a slight correction there.

This is splitting hairs, but the other is you only mentioned the #1 thing about EndeavourOS as a footnote at the very end. “The community aspect” is about 99% of why any of us are here. The whole reason for EndeavourOS existing today is partly because the devs wanted to carry on the community aspect of it. I would’ve emphasized that in at least half of the entire post on that aspect alone, as that makes EndeavourOS stand out.

But other than that, it was a good write up!

@sradjoker yeah, I might’ve added on to some of those downvotes :crazy_face:

3 Likes

Yeah, I don’t think everyone understands the phrase “TUI” so I figure terminal based GUI or console based GUI might communicate the concept better for those unfamiliar with it. I can probably add a TUI definition in parenthesis though.

Just say TUI (terminal user interface). Adding GUI to the beginning or the end of your statement will honestly just confuse people to think it’s like some pamac thing. For example saying pacseek a GUI in a terminal. pamac a GUI with a terminal. Confusing perhaps? Like I said, it’s just a nitpick, but it’s better to just say things how they are so users learn the terms correctly the first time, instead of being possibly being confused.

1 Like

This is true but they also wanted to stick to the KISS philosophy of a somewhat vanilla Arch. I do like the fact that it has stuck to this principle and added some custom apps that are recognizably EOS. I use some GUI apps such as pamac-aur-git and i have also used discover and i have very little problems if i decide to use them. I do like the fact that we continue on the same path and make small changes based on the original goals. EndeavourOS doesn’t need to do things just because some user wants it. It’s based on the work load for the devs. I’m happy with the direction EOS has taken and the journey is an Endeavour. I prefer the terminal centric vision as it stands. I feel that new users learn more this way. I don’t want to get caught up in the BTW or GUI vs TUI. The user can make their own choice keeping in mind that not all things work how they think they should on all hardware.

2 Likes

@Scotty_Trees
All you can give me is brocolli? Where’s the burgers or steak? :laughing:

1 Like

Very nice write-up @npaladin2000, and your note briefly explains about EndeavourOS.


Just for interest in following comment :

I use my PC as a daily driver and for work so I cannot afford to spend time tweaking stuff when updates are available; ******* has always allowed me to update with confidence every morning, before starting my working day

Do we really need to perform tweaks daily, when we need to update :grinning: ?

One more interesting comment :

Question to sugar-coated Arch fork users: why don't you use a complete system like Fedora or even Mint? Arch is a DIY system and if you skip the DIY stage it IMO loses most of its purpose. I can't imagine Manjaro or Endeavour users really tinker with their systems; they just use it because someone told them "rolling-release is better for gaming" (bullshit) or something

Also,

and the most annoying one was whenever I wanted to take a screenshot, it would consistently capture a picture of what was happening several minutes to a whole hour ago.

this one is related to Spectacle, I guess. Though, this issue was fixed by discussions in forum, for which few clicks were needed if I remember.

My little doubt :

Windows actually functions more like a rolling release than a "stable" model,

Why I think that newer OS upgrades in Windows requires newer system specifications :rofl: :stuck_out_tongue:?



I use Arch (vanilla) because it's a decent quality rolling release

How can we distinguish b/w qualities of rolling release ?

image

How +1 :grin: :grinning:?

Yeah, there were definitely some…opinionated comments on there. I’m really REALLY trying to be nice and reflect the qualities of Endeavour and not turn into a BTW neckbeard like some people on a certain Reddit thread that I might have posted. :wink: But overall they have been a minority.

I was interested to find the guy who decided that Endeavour was NOT his choice based on the write up. He was looking for something easier, and more insulation from the terminal, mostly so it didn’t feel like he was working all the time. I get that, makes sense.

Yes, he/she basically pointed out his/her expectations and needs from their system.

Can you help me over this ?

Well, there are a few different models. OpenSUSE does it differently, as does Void and Debian Unstable and a few others. OpenSUSE has some sort of automated testing system they use to try and ensure some level of stability, not sure how much because no one uses OpenSUSE in real life (I joke of course but it isn’t all that popular). Debian Sid is even more bleeding edge than Arch, it’s literally there to test the latest stuff. Void seems to be slower about releasing packages but is still technically rolling. So the different implementations can have different behavior when used daily. Now, whether one is BETTER or not, might be open to vigorous debate, but my personal preference is for the Arch model, at least for desktops.

1 Like

%:100: fair and well written, @npaladin2000

2 Likes

Nice write up. That could be a good read for some of the people from this forum. Using more the terminal is what got me excited about eos in the first place. And it is the distro I learned most from, it felt like I got stuck 10 years on my linux knowledge, until I launched this rocket in my computer. Made leaps within months (for my own standards).

1 Like

I feel the same way. I came to EOS from Manjaro a little over 2 years ago and although I’m more the youngest, I’ve made the greatest learning progress here.

I used to be fond of having timeshift running in the background in case something went wrong with updates. Since there were problems with Timeshift regarding rsync, I have completely abandoned it (also no btrfs & snapper) and literally waited for something to hang. EOS runs like a sewing machine …

1 Like

I actually also came from Manjaro. I moved to a rural area with ultra slow slow internet.

I wanted to switch to something with less updates. For reference, it took me about 50min to download an iso with 2.3 Gb.

I tried different distros, debian etc. I was even trying arch without GUI. But then I stumbled on Endeavour OS, I tried it and loved it! And of course I was unreasonable and started using the rolling release distro. However, still less updates than on Manjaro.

Probably because I was using the terminal :wink: and discovered i3wm which uses less resources.

2 Likes

I came from Antergos. :wink:

2 Likes

Hey, I came from Red Hat 7…originally anyway. :joy: Jeez I’ve been through so many distros over the years…

I was on Antergos for one day :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

1 Like

I was there for some time and then i here like magic! :magic_wand:

:enos: :enos_flag: :penguin_face: :rocketa_purple:

1 Like

Not sure how this individual is defining “tinker”, but my motivation for coming to Endeavour was so that I just have the apps I want rather than a lot of apps I will never use.

3 Likes