tl;dr Title

It’s common knowledge at this point that Arch has a reputation for being very difficult to use which led to it becoming a meme ( like everything else on the internet). Even tho Arch users swear that it is actually trivial to install and use for someone who is willing to read documentation, it is also known that distributions with significantly higher requirements on overall *nix knowledge like Gentoo, Oasis, KISS and Crux (?) exist. So my question is this: was Arch used to be harder to install and use? Because I heard bad things about Debian’s installation process too, even tho it is incredibly easy now. I also hear Ubuntu being bad for user privacy, even tho that whole Amazon thing happened years ago under a completely different management. Things move fast in Linux family’s world, was Arch a very different system back in 2006?

  • @Jojonintendo@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    73 years ago

    Arch is not necessarily difficult, it’s like installing Debian via manually partitioning and debootstrapping it. The documentation is amazing and, most of the time, enough for setting up any kind of system.

    Some people definitely take it too seriously, like it’s some rite of passage, and then act like jerks towards new users, which makes the Arch community unwelcoming most of the time. But it’s a very good distro overall, very reliable.