Why you should be using Arch

[backseatjuan]

a). it's easy to install, with zen installer literally 10 minutes.
b). it is more stable than Debian based systems, reason being is that Debian based stuff is frozen 4 years in the past and new stuff breaks things when mixed with old stuff. No such thing with Arch, everything is new and everything works. Stability on rolling release is a myth, from my experience.
c). it does not slow down. Unlike for example Ubuntu, which after several months get bugged down, slower and slower for whatever reason, Arch is always fast and ultra light, even if you use all the same software.
d). it optimizes compiled code for your architecture whether you have sandy bridge or ivy lake, little differences add up.
c). it has the largest software repository, AUR. Forget about going to sites and downloading rpms or debs or adding additional repos, everything is in AUR, even stuff that is only available on github, you open up nice GUI and type the name of software and usually you are presented with several things, like binaries, stable version you can build and optimize for your architecture, or bleeding edge version you can build and also optimize for your architecture.
e). there are no dev packages, each package already includes source which results in less overall packages being installed.
f). there are dozens of kernels available, such as zen and xanmod which do speed up graphics and io.

So if you're doing your Linux adventure, the answer is Arch. Not manjaro because it's not arch and not endevouros because it has wrong screenfetch icon, and not ubuntu or mint because it's crap, and not fedora because they managed to take stuff that works in arch and make it work poorly in fedora. The answer is a proper rolling release, the answer is Arch. It's your final Linux that will run trouble free for years to come without reinstall.

Beyond Arch is only Gentoo, you compile everything and optimize everything for your architecture, which will be even faster and lighter than Arch. Unfortunately Gentoo does not have an easy installer like zen.

If everyone would start with Arch, Linux would be easy. Too easy! For you to install wifite2 you have to go to github and follow instructions, for me, open up GUI and install wifite2, done.

 

[Morpheus]

a). it's easy to install, with zen installer literally 10 minutes.
b). it is more stable than Debian based systems, reason being is that Debian based stuff is frozen 4 years in the past and new stuff breaks things when mixed with old stuff. No such thing with Arch, everything is new and everything works. Stability on rolling release is a myth, from my experience.
c). it does not slow down. Unlike for example Ubuntu, which after several months get bugged down, slower and slower for whatever reason, Arch is always fast and ultra light, even if you use all the same software.
d). it optimizes compiled code for your architecture whether you have sandy bridge or ivy lake, little differences add up.
c). it has the largest software repository, AUR. Forget about going to sites and downloading rpms or debs or adding additional repos, everything is in AUR, even stuff that is only available on github, you open up nice GUI and type the name of software and usually you are presented with several things, like binaries, stable version you can build and optimize for your architecture, or bleeding edge version you can build and also optimize for your architecture.
e). there are no dev packages, each package already includes source which results in less overall packages being installed.
f). there are dozens of kernels available, such as zen and xanmod which do speed up graphics and io.

So if you're doing your Linux adventure, the answer is Arch. Not manjaro because it's not arch and not endevouros because it has wrong screenfetch icon, and not ubuntu or mint because it's crap, and not fedora because they managed to take stuff that works in arch and make it work poorly in fedora. The answer is a proper rolling release, the answer is Arch. It's your final Linux that will run trouble free for years to come without reinstall.

Beyond Arch is only Gentoo, you compile everything and optimize everything for your architecture, which will be even faster and lighter than Arch. Unfortunately Gentoo does not have an easy installer like zen.

If everyone would start with Arch, Linux would be easy. Too easy! For you to install wifite2 you have to go to github and follow instructions, for me, open up GUI and install wifite2, done.

I've been using Arch for years without even being aware that there was an installer! So thanks!

You are right, one never seems to need to have to reinstall. I don't know that it is that easy to maintain, even if it is easier to install now. Though if one is willing to learn, the Arch wiki and forums are excellent sources of information, so I can't say that I've ever had any regrets.

I'm presently trying to move to Guix (more Lisp and less systemd), though it has had to be gradual given that, being comparatively new and less pluralistic, in spite of being more advanced in some ways, it does lack many of the strengths that Arch has that you rightly mention.

 

[xplt]

Starting out with Arch when you're interested in Linux can give you a real advantage. What got me to Arch was the lightweight aspect. Building your OS from scratch is preferable for me, AUR and the excellent documentation are a huge plus, too.
I refuse GUIs on Linux as much as possible, working with the shell gives you an insight on the OS structure, like nothing else.

I also tried Manjaro years ago, but even stable releases crashed my system on regular basis. For me the only Linux OS, which I had to reinstall every now and then.

I switched back to Debian recently, just feels like home to me. On my Notebook I'm running Parrot OS, never had any issues in the last two years.

 

[Morpheus]

Starting out with Arch when you're interested in Linux can give you a real advantage. What got me to Arch was the lightweight aspect. Building your OS from scratch is preferable for me, AUR and the excellent documentation are a huge plus, too.
I refuse GUIs on Linux as much as possible, working with the shell gives you an insight on the OS structure, like nothing else.

I also tried Manjaro years ago, but even stable releases crashed my system on regular basis. For me the only Linux OS, which I had to reinstall every now and then.

I switched back to Debian recently, just feels like home to me. On my Notebook I'm running Parrot OS, never had any issues in the last two years.

I quickly discovered when installing Arch that you could install so few packages that it was not even possible to update the system. That was about the only thing that required me to reinstall it. Ever since, I've downloaded every network package I could find before rebooting.

I couldn't agree more about the light weight, GUI free aspect though. A light weight system means that not only do you not have to reinstall it but you also don't ever need to upgrade your hardware either. It's also been my experience that the command line or a minimal GUI like one finds in emacs is usually considerable more efficient and faster in the long run anyway, as much as one might have to learn how to use it.

I'd never heard of ParrotOS before, so thanks for drawing it to my attention.

 

[Jack12345]

F arch. I dont even know what it is. As long as it not gives me pvssy I dont care why should i use it

 

[Desdinova]

I've been using the same Ubuntu install for a few years now (14.04). I have everything set up the way I want it, it works, it's not slow, and all my software is here. I absolutely hate upgrading or reinstalling. Just because it's new, it doesn't mean I need it. I don't have time to be playing with OS stuff.