I’ve been using Linux Mint since forever. I’ve never felt a reason to change. But I’m interested in what persuaded others to move.
Every couple of years I think to myself “You know, I can’t actually remember why I don’t like Ubuntu. It must have just been some weird one-off thing that soured me on it last time. Besides, I’ve got N more years of Linux experience under my belt, so I know how to avoid sticky situations with apt, and they’ve had N more years to make their OS more user friendly! I pride myself on not holding grudges, and if this distro still gets recommended to newbies, how bad can it possibly be, especially for someone with my level of expertise?”
And then I download Ubuntu.
And then I remember.
As someone who hates Windows with a passion, once everyone recommend Linux Mint, I knew I had to try it.
I immediately had negative first impressions. I simply don’t wanna use something with a desktop environment that reminds me of something that I hate. I get that it makes transitioning a lot easier for many, but for me it simply looks too similar to Windows.
Most of them.
-
Debian world - apt sucks. For something with a sole purpose of resolving a dependency tree, it’s surprisingly bad at that.
-
Redhat world - everything is soooo old. I can see why business people like it, buy I rarely, if ever, agree with business people.
-
Opensuse world - I’ve only tried it once, probably 15 years ago. Didn’t really know my way around computers all that much at the time, but it didn’t click and I’ve left it. Later on I found out about their selling out to Microsoft and never bothered touching it again.
-
Arch - it was my daily for a year or two. Big fan. It still runs my email. At some point the size of packages started to annoy me, though. Still has the best wiki. I’ve never really bothered with the spinoffs, as the model of Arch makes them useless and more problematic to deal with.
I’ve got the Gentoo bug now. For the first time I genuinely feel
~/. A lean, mean system of machines :)never really bothered with the spinoffs, as the model of Arch makes them useless and more problematic to deal with
I highly enjoy using EndeavourOS. But then again, I wouldn’t classify it as a spinoff, it’s pretty much vanilla Arch, but purple.
Now Manjaro on the other hand… Tried it and understood why so many people don’t like it within the first week.
Now Manjaro on the other hand… Tried it and understood why so many people don’t like it within the first week.
I see this a lot and nobody really ever explains, properly, why.
I have used Linux off and on for many years (mainly server OS such as RHEL and CentOS). I have now migrated from Windows desktop to Manjaro KDE. Using it for a year. Had one issue (wouldn’t boot after a kernel update), which I sorted quickly. Other than that it’s been rock solid.
But this isn’t a ‘I have a great experience so you’re all just haters’ post.
I know the stuff about it being a week or behind Arch. I remember something about the maintainers (can’t remember specifics) but they seem to be minor niggles that don’t affect most people.
Genuine question.
Why do you dislike Manjaro? I also know it’s a common theme to dislike it, so any other insight there?
Not the guy you asked, but my 2 main gripes are:
- holding back main repos and not aur? That’s dumb and just asking for trouble.
- sheer incompetence. Remember their certs expiring? Remember their public recommended workaround? That’s webdev level of bs. They absolutely do not understand their own setup.
-
