Isn’t archwiki one of the most comprehended wikis for Linux distros out there? If anything, the arch-wiki (to me) has often too many answers for the same problem than the other way around.
The Arch wiki is great, but Arch is a terrible platform for newbies, unless they go into Linux with the intent to do a deep dive into the structure behind a Linux OS.
I switched like ten years ago because I wanted to learn the details, but in all honesty I still feel like I barely understand anything. Not sure how normal this is, maybe I’m unusually dumb, but I feel like what I’ve really learned is how to troubleshoot and solve issues by reading documentation and tinkering, rather than understanding what I’m actually doing. I’ve had a stable system for years but I kind of feel like if a typical arch forum poster looked my system configuration for five minutes they’d be like wtf are you doing.
Knowing you don’t know everything is what makes you smart. Arch helps keep people smart by forcing them to be on edge all the time by feeding everyone the most recent, often not very well-tested versions of software. All the shiny new tech, with some of the sharp edges that still need to be sanded down.
Every time you learn how to configure a tool or daemon or subsystem, a new, shinier tool comes out, or there’s a major update, or you discover an approach that works better for you. The Linux landscape is constantly shifting. You can bite down and stick with what you know (CentOS and derivatives are great for that!) or you can stay along for the ride.
Weird shitty configs is the Arch Linux life. The flexibility is what allows you to configure your system in whatever way works for you, and until it inevitably all explodes with some future update, it’s probably best not to touch anything and break your config because there’s a “better” way. Unless you like that stuff, of course.
Most people want a functional OS, they don’t care about the benefits of NetworkManager over its competition. Figuring out every possible configuration setting and finding the right combination to get everything working as intended takes forever.
Some people are into that, and power to them, but most people aren’t.
It is most comprehended, but for newbie it is too comprehensive. Its overwhelming, I tried to troubleshoot why I boot to black screen even the installation said its successful and there’s no error. I saw solutions that want me edit grub, edit xorg … and some other file that I never understand.
I understand the wiki is very good and very important, its just not newbie friendly.
The Arch wiki is one of the most impressive documentation resources I’ve seen and I’ve only [needed to] scrape the surface so far. Almost every minor unexpected issue I ran into along the way had a detailed solution and the only issue I haven’t been able to resolve is getting all the buttons on my mouse to work…but did find out it’s Logitech’s weird receiver codes that are the issue and they don’t release drivers for Linux.
Isn’t archwiki one of the most comprehended wikis for Linux distros out there? If anything, the arch-wiki (to me) has often too many answers for the same problem than the other way around.
The Arch wiki is great, but Arch is a terrible platform for newbies, unless they go into Linux with the intent to do a deep dive into the structure behind a Linux OS.
I switched like ten years ago because I wanted to learn the details, but in all honesty I still feel like I barely understand anything. Not sure how normal this is, maybe I’m unusually dumb, but I feel like what I’ve really learned is how to troubleshoot and solve issues by reading documentation and tinkering, rather than understanding what I’m actually doing. I’ve had a stable system for years but I kind of feel like if a typical arch forum poster looked my system configuration for five minutes they’d be like wtf are you doing.
If you know where to look and where to tinker, then I think you have at least some understanding of what you’re doing.
Knowing you don’t know everything is what makes you smart. Arch helps keep people smart by forcing them to be on edge all the time by feeding everyone the most recent, often not very well-tested versions of software. All the shiny new tech, with some of the sharp edges that still need to be sanded down.
Every time you learn how to configure a tool or daemon or subsystem, a new, shinier tool comes out, or there’s a major update, or you discover an approach that works better for you. The Linux landscape is constantly shifting. You can bite down and stick with what you know (CentOS and derivatives are great for that!) or you can stay along for the ride.
Weird shitty configs is the Arch Linux life. The flexibility is what allows you to configure your system in whatever way works for you, and until it inevitably all explodes with some future update, it’s probably best not to touch anything and break your config because there’s a “better” way. Unless you like that stuff, of course.
Is actually great since it forces you to learn which saves you much more time in the long run.
But most people can’t see past their nose.
Edit
Can’t believe somebody got offended by this…
couldve stopped at the first sentence, but had to keep with the stereotype i guess ;)
??
Smug sense of superiority. You’re special and do things the right way because everyone else is too dumb.
Jesus fucking christ what a bunch of drama queens
you’re doing a really good job of breaking this stereotype, bub
To be fair, your original comment would have been more likely to push people towards trying Arch if it didn’t have the last sentence.
You can’t invite people to your party by antagonizing them.
It is great when you have time to learn, but when you are trying to troubleshoot while understand basically nothing of the wiki … it is not good.
Most people want a functional OS, they don’t care about the benefits of NetworkManager over its competition. Figuring out every possible configuration setting and finding the right combination to get everything working as intended takes forever.
Some people are into that, and power to them, but most people aren’t.
Can’t believe you got so offended someone was offended you edited your comment…
I’m not in just tired to deal with whiny bitches
to be fair, i wasnt offened :) just wanted to point out the irony
oh nooo, you weren’t offended at all (:
I run Debian and I regularly look at the Arch wiki.
It is most comprehended, but for newbie it is too comprehensive. Its overwhelming, I tried to troubleshoot why I boot to black screen even the installation said its successful and there’s no error. I saw solutions that want me edit grub, edit xorg … and some other file that I never understand.
I understand the wiki is very good and very important, its just not newbie friendly.
The Arch wiki is one of the most impressive documentation resources I’ve seen and I’ve only [needed to] scrape the surface so far. Almost every minor unexpected issue I ran into along the way had a detailed solution and the only issue I haven’t been able to resolve is getting all the buttons on my mouse to work…but did find out it’s Logitech’s weird receiver codes that are the issue and they don’t release drivers for Linux.
That’s the issue. Arch and it’s wiki are labyrinths for beginners.
For anyone not interested in tinkering all-day long they’re better off using fedora, debian or suse.
True