Hello EndeavourOS fans,
I have been using this great OS on my laptop for about a year now and I’ve had ABSOLUTELY NO PROBLEMS which is cool because it is my daily driver
Now just today I was checking distrowatch and was stunned to see that this project has reached #4! Congratulations!! Also, Happy birthday EndeavourOS and thank you to every one of you for this great distro!!
Depends on where you look:)
It can be on places 5, 4, 3 or 2
If you use the standard 6 mth chart: June 25.
It’s on the top of my charts!
And absolutely deserved. I’ve been distro-hopping since the early days of Debian and Slackware… EndeavourOS is home now
I think this is an absolutely deserved ranking. It is also a fact that there is undeservedly little talk of the EOS in the media.
Undeservedly maybe, but not at all surprising. Media covers flashy “Out-of-the-box” “just-like-Windows” Linux, not “yes-you-have-to-use-the-terminal” Linux. Arch - which I think isn’t complicated at all - has the same “problem”, not being flashy or using fancy GUIs to let you point and click but instead relying on the terminal and users actually knowing what they’re doing to get shit done.
Reminds me of a story from a guy working at a power-plant in the 80s (? I think. I read it on Quora but cannot find it anymore, so I’ll summarize what I remember of it). They wanted to get new security-software which was desperately needed but quite expensive. The guys in charge were there for a presentation of the new software, and he was pretty sure they wouldn’t get the bosses to buy the much-needed software. So he modified a little thing: Instead of showing the results in black/grey/white, he added colors to make it look flashy. The bosses were fascinated by the colored pictures and immediately granted the needed funding.
The thing is “yes-you-have-to-use-the-terminal” is more like “yes you have to use internet explorer to download firefox” (before you jump your guns, I’m not saying the terminal is bad like IE, I’m saying what the OS creators tout as the main tool gets to be used as a tool to download a more preferable tool by many). You’re not really forced to use the terminal with endeavourOS, otherwise it wouldn’t be as close to MX Linux or Manjaro in the charts. You have to use it to download a proper GUI package manager in EOS though. Which is what anyone coming from other popular distros will do. It’s more of a small artificial bump in the road. I’m talking from a newcomer’s point of view now.
It’s true, with use I started to rely on the terminal to do any changes to my programs, pamac still has its uses as a search tool though. It would be interesting to see through a poll how many EOS users don’t have pacman, octopi, bauh or any other GUI package manager installed and solely rely on the terminal. I’m ready to bet that people having a GUI installed make up more than half the userbase and I suspect it’s also over 75%.
You might be right. Coming from Arch I might just be so used to do everything in the terminal that I don’t even try to do it via GUI. ^^
I have to admit that when I was only vaguely familiar with current distros I didn’t think much about Arch and I definitely hadn’t heard of Endeavour OS.
But when I was looking into which distro to install I quickly realised that Arch would meet my needs better than most which lead me to Endeavour OS with a little more research into distros based on Arch.
It’s coming for that #1 spot, and believe me it will get it
In my own journey; so I can’t speak for others. There was a tipping point where because of my line of work Terminal became absolutely paramount in my day to day practices. In most cases the preferred daily driver method I feel ends up being your over all method of choice. For instance as I progressed from Windows to Linux I preferred GUI interfaces; configuration tools; an intellisense ide that held my hand when I made a mistake. It made my day to day life easier and I didn’t have to think too much.
As my career progressed and I found myself buried in terminal configurations and scrubbing through BASH implementations; I would return to my GUI life and get frustrated at the lack of what I now considered simplicity. The knowledge was now there to fix what used to be complex tasks simply by updating the configs. Vi became my day to day text editor and programming tool; and my ‘daily driver’ slowly became terminal based configs purely because for me the tipping point of ‘ease of use’ became ‘cli is faster; cleaner; easier and I can parse the information to get what I want’.
Endeavor fills that void nicely. And I would imagine others that prefer terminal tools have a similar line in the sand simply preferring the speed and parse ability of the outputs over a GUI. While still wanting the flexibility of the GUI available for certain tasks and not feeling the need for the modular nature of Void or Gentoo.
There are people who like to use the terminal, and there are people who are wrong and do not like to use the terminal. The latter are not best served by a terminal-centric distro like EndeavourOS. Fortunately, there are so many distros to choose from, there is Linux for everyone.
This is an oxymoron, at least on an Arch-based system
That’s a bit harsh - it COULD happen someday…
I find I like a GUI for some things, but I started when CLI was all there was for most systems - except for the C64, where you lived in a BASIC interpreter (but still had to type). My first GUI was on the Amiga - so I learned to use it for some things - but system tasks were still much faster in CLI. Being a straightforward system, I ended up writing CLI tools that had GUI interfaces too, for my own use. Those were the days - I often used assembly to create them! Especially as the OS had easily accessible routines for nearly everything - including doubly-linked lists for handling memory and disk tasks as well as anything you wanted to borrow them for!
Between AmigaDOS and Arexx, it was more powerful (including interprocess communication) and MUCH easier than bash - pity that M$ killed it off…
Well, yes, for certain things GUI is better than the terminal. Even though you can edit audio, video and photo files and do 3D modelling in the terminal, those things tend to work better in the GUI. Also video games with a GUI tend to be better than terminal-based video games
However, maintenance of an Arch-based system is not one of those things.
I don’t think it matters if a person wants to use a GUI tool or not instead of the terminal. What matters is that EOS stick to it’s original philosophy that has served it well. KISS … almost vanilla Arch. I like the idea that it includes yay. I believe yay is also the right tool to include. Those who want to use a different tool already know how to use the AUR and what they are looking for so they can install what ever they want. Including yay for new adopters of Arch keeps it simple. I personally like it and have tried others. I have no reason to change. As far as other GUI tools that is entirely an individual choice. Use what ever tools suits you. EOS on the other hand as @Bryanpwo has said isn’t going to include those other GUI tools like Pamac etc or otherwise then you have to include other things which now starts lead to bloat and defers from the original path. KISS! But i don’t think it’s a rule that you can’t use a GUI tool on Arch. To each his own.
Does not surprise me. Great community and distro. And no, I don’t like to use the terminal. Luckily I don’t have to.
Wrong? I’m not wrong…I’m just Terminally shy!
Edit: Besides I don’t want to be like all those other kids on Arch!