EOS would also be worth joining. https://www.trylinux.today
It is available under “Arch” advanced!
A site that uses outdated logos (Manjaro) is not up to date anyway.
personal beginner / intermediate / Advanced , is also subjective.
Manjaro is not a beginner distro. but depends mostly what your view is also
All easy Arch installers or forks could say its intermediate to advanced… even manjaro has some functions but has also there issues…
its not about easy installing or easy framework also for some details. i do think people can experience different.
Many web-sites say that Manjaro is a distro well suited for beginners, and I believe it is true for the most part, even though I haven’t been using it for a very long time. I agree that categorizing the distros can be subjective, but it is also useful for people who are still new to Linux. I’d probably have never tried an Arch-based distro in the first place if I wasn’t sure that it is beginner-friendly.
I think Manjaro is a distribution for beginners in terms of ease of use. Easy to install graphically. You do not need a detailed knowledge of Linux command line commands to use it. Although just one of my experiences with Debian Sid yesterday, it says it’s pretty user-friendly.
I would never recommend a rolling release to a beginner. I would recommend a distribution with fixed release cycles and stable, well tested packages. These might not be the latest, but definitely more reliable. It is a fact, that rolling releases tend to have/cause more problems than stable releases.
The problem is that users who are used to Windows habits, suffer versionitis and are always out for the latest releases of programs. So a lot of them install distributions which are more difficult to handle. That’s at least my experience as a moderator. In addition to that, they have the wrong idea, that they have to do a new install, when a new stable release is out. Which is definitely a wrong assumption.
From my own experience, I agree with you that Manjaro Linux is quite beginner-friendly even compared to EOS.
From my perspective EOS is Arch made accessible, Manjaro - Arch made friendly. I am happy that they both exist
I’m far from telling something else. I just think, to keep to the leveling of user skills, that users, who intend to install them, should at least be intermediate, so they know what can be done, if some updates break your system. In the worst case not being able to ask for help in a forum.
I can’t say anything about Manjaro. I never used it. EndeavourOS is my first Arch based distribution.
The best thing about Endeavour (imo) is that it not only gives you access to a great OS, but also teaches you how to handle it. For example It encourages the use of terminal which is, in my opinion, a very important part of learning Linux. And probably is a must for an Arch system. Other distros that claim to be friendly usually try to keep the user as far from the terminal as possible.
I certainly wouldn’t have called myself “intermediate” when I just started using EOS, but I am getting close with its help
I think it depends on who you are, and where you “come from”. For me Arch was my first real attempt on Linux, so to me it’s a beginners distro.
I gave Mint a very short try, but I found it to Windows-like and ready made, and at the time I was on a massive anti-Microsoft hating spree. Arch seemed to be the logical answer to what I was looking for, and lo and behold it was, but tjeez I really borkt up the system several times, and did a lot of manual installs starting over.
Antergos kind of came as an easier way of getting it done (and LUKS on LVM “for free”). In hindsight Endeavour is so much better in many ways, but at the time it was pure bliss.
Debian on the other hand is… strange to me, and hence advanced.
Again I agree. That is the reason why we, in the other forum, when it’s up to solving problems usually show and explain both ways. In my opinion it makes understanding easier, if you see both ways side by side. It IS necessary that you know how to do things in a terminal. It really is surprising how many users (after they have overcome the fear of the unknown) start to show interest or even have fun using a terminal. But it makes them feel more secure, if they have a fallback they are used to (Windows point and click) to rely on.
In the end you and I are not too far apart. Only the approach is a little different. Both points of view are, at least in my opinion, valid.
When the Arch started, it was a playground for geeks. At the time, even I didn’t dare use Arch. From the outside, it seemed very complicated.
Yet using Debian today is pretty beginner-friendly and secure.
This is not necessarily true for Debian.
Wasn’t Linux itself a playground for geeks when it just started?
I never used Debian. In general, I don’t have much experience with other distros. So it was just my biased and limited point of view based on the things I heard/read.
Moreover, in many cases, there is only a command line solution. See, for example, the occasional package errors.
Perhaps - but I was using it back then too, and I still don’t qualify yet as a geek! I suppose loading a distro from floppies (a LOT of floppies!) and fighting with ATI video timing to get Motif to run qualifies as playing though…
BTW - the progression seems to be:
so I might get to geek level yet
Arch still is complicated. Depending on what you want to do besides just installing it.
I agree with you that a thorough knowledge of how to use the command line is still essential to Arch today.