Why choose EndeavourOs over Manjaro?

About a year ago I started using Manjaro and Antergos in parallel. For me, all of these systems have worked and are stable to this day. Interested in what are the reasons behind EndeavourOs, as opposed to Manjaro, for both novice and advanced users?

To be honest, you can’t compare us with Manjaro. If you’re looking for the safe and stable experience and that the devs have done all the heavy lifting for you, stay with Manjaro.

If you’re looking for a challenge with the help from a friendly community in your Linux experience, then you can consider us.

It really is up to you, there is no good and better in this case.

10 Likes

Let’s take a picture you’ll understand easily.

Archlinux: mother
Antergos: aunt (mother’s sister)
Manjaro archlinux’s daughter

Can we compare a mother with her daughter?

4 Likes

As for all arch-based distro’s is basicly close one is more vanilla then the other other is mayby better configured.

Manjaro is also a different beast as package base does use the same system.
but brings multiple different kernels that can be confusing also because it has all different names. also for grub systemd and some tools are there own.

as it can be user friendly but can be confusing as comes to kernel updates. As Arch more kiss as a way then manjaro, because it brings not so much different kernels standard also if some new comes up you get automatically thats not with manjaro the case, they use lts as base but if you want something new you have to change. on kernel base they used also to bring the edge on kernels in unstable but is also an option.

There is no best distro at the end. as arch as endeavouros except EnOS brings a easy installer on some part want to keep it simpel in a way you can learn the patch of the arch aswell. without confusing multiple packages or kernels. there is no right answer what is good or bad :slight_smile:

I think Endeavour is more about keeping things simple and freedom of choice. Mostly vanilla Arch with some helpful tools to make the system your own and learn something along the way. When it’s simple it is easier for me to understand how it works. :slight_smile:
At Manjaro you get what you get. Of course you can reconfigure the system but it seems to me a lot more work and you learn more about the Manjaro-System, not the Arch- or Linux-System. Somehow it feels more bloated and less flexible. At least for me.

3 Likes

@zoli62 I was the same i used Antergos and Manajro in parallel but Antergos was always my go to. Using Antergos i learned a lot more about Arch. With Manjaro i also learned some things but it seemed to be more Manjaro specific. Eventually i turned my sights to Arch installs and was really disappointed when Antergos shutdown. For me Antergos always worked and i never really had that many problems. When Endeavour came to fruition i decided to jump onboard. I’m very pleased so far and still learning.:slightly_smiling_face:

2 Likes

I agree with the difference: I wouldn’t call Antergos aunt, rather a son.

No. They share the same repositories, besides Antergos third party one.

1 Like

Endeavour is a step closer towards vanilla Arch. They don’t put a lot of stuff in there which I love - it’s up to the user to install what they want as opposed to spend hours and days removing stuff I have no use for. Vanilla Arch (commandline) ain’t really useful - you need some sort of enviroment - at least a browser and a terminal and this is where I think Endeavour stands out. They don’t give you much more - well a file manager and a display manager I think I removed IIRC.
So for me Endeavour is the distro that gets me closest to vanilla Arch without actually doing the boring install steps.

4 Likes

I also think Antergos / EndeavourOs is much more configurable, in that sense Manjaro is more closed. Maybe they would say Manjaro Linux is MacOs for arch-based distributions, though maybe a bit of an exaggeration.

For me, the discontinued Antergos still works. I’m only trying EndeavourOs on a virtual machine, but I find it promising. I’m cautious about running new systems. :slight_smile:

@zoli62 I converted Antergos over to Arch repos and removed all Antergos packages. When Endeavour started i converted to Endeavour repos. Then i installed EnddeavourOS and wiped out the old system. I’m now strictly EndeavourOS on all my systems.

Offtopic. What’s the disadvantage of not converting a working Antergos to an Archo repos system?

offtopic: but there is non. :slight_smile:

1 Like

But you did update the packages that were in the Antergos repo, right? Otherwise you have extremely outdated packages, they were already out of date when Antergos was running.

1 Like

I can answer this for you. but it wont really apply to everyone because not everyone needs strange nonstandard packages from the AUR.

manjaro has a huge problem because its held back for ‘stability’ which is arguable at best. so often times if you use packages that have a different set of compile flags or features not enabled in the pacman package (chromium-vaapi and the modified vaapi->nvidia wrapper for it come to mind) from the AUR, the system can break or it can fail to install/build due to mismatched dependencies.

other times, you can have them installed fine but the AUR package updates before the system packages and therefore breaks anyway

if you just install and go without getting into it enough to get the system hacked to a point where stuff thats not supposed to work on linux does (like hardware accelerated web browser i mentioned), then you probably will see almost 0 difference aside from themes…

but there are cases in which pure arch and sticking to the upstream is better and allows software that otherwise wont work or install to function. so really it depends on what your going to install on the machine and how heavily you end up relying on AUR packages.

While this doesnt really happen often, or with all packages in the AUR it does and can happen where manjaro is just not compatible with a package there.

As far as this or formerly antergos its literally just arch with an installer. so anything that works on arch will work here by default – so all you have to do is read the package comments in order to see any potential issues.

Hello! I am one of the people that use both EndeavourOS and Manjaro. They are both good and I like using both OSes. If you like using Pamac use Manjaro, if you like using command line use EOS.

One word - lightweight.

1 Like

thats not certainly true :slight_smile:

i use also a gui but not pamac, (tkpacman) , but there are several gui’s outside pamac also.

1 Like

You make it sound like what you get otob is all there is - which is wrong ofc. Use pamac on EOS if you want and use the commandline in Manjaro if you want. The difference between the two distros are bigger than just the packages it ships with - but both are based on Arch so the similarities are also there ofc.

@spiroth10

made me truly :laughing:
I envisioned an alien species’ repository when I read that

You are partially right ofc - there are a lot of questionable stuff in the AUR but there’s also some gems in there. As long as one knows what it is one actually is installing I think AUR is a goldmine.

1 Like