Is Arch Linux the worst thing about the Linux community?

Is Arch Linux the worst thing about the Linux community?

A breeding ground of undeserved pride and elitism that pollutes otherwise welcoming Linux communities.

Elitists simply know their shit and are not afraid to disclose how retarded you are.
You should take it as an incentive to git gud instead of crying like a little bitch, nobody cares about your feelings you dumb kid.

>Elitists simply know their shit

>undeserved pride and elitism
No, this is just what people think Arch users are like

Congrats, they're skilled in something completely useless.

Yep

Yes, and you're a part of the problem.

This. Honestly can't stand Debian crybabies, and let's be real here, they all use Debian or Debian derivatives.

no really, the arch wiki is really comprehensive and so I find it understandable when people just refer you to it

I'd like to see the average Sup Forums Arch user take an LPI-3 certification or write a kernel patch :)

The worst thing about Arch is that it literally has no advantages over "noob" distros like Ubuntu.

Granted, it's the best distribution for taking screenshots of your desktop and telling everyone about it all day 24/7/365

Oh right it's great for autofellatio I'll give it that LOL

Arch is the greatest thing to have happened to Linux. Stay salty noobuntu fag

No, that's freetards.

No, that's what easily impressionable kiddos on Sup Forums think Arch users are like, due to the fact that it's such an easy troll.

Most Arch "elite" types are kids who don't know their behind from their elbow. No one genuinely knowledgable would prop up the 1337 meme about it.

I'd rather have elitists than autists

Ubuntu is too bloated to even run on my Dell Latitude. Arch runs great on it. In fact, nothing Arch does even takes it to 50% CPU usage. Fuck off.

This is what I was implying, albeit without being quite so explicit

I only have a problem when they try to pawn it off to noobs looking for their first linux distro

>perfect example of a clueless Sup Forums Arch user
They really don't understand even the basics of Linux distros.

kill yourself

Yup. To each their own but Arch nemesis constantly gloat about their Systemd cancer. Atleast Debian and Slackware support other init systems. The main reason I moved out of the Arch community is because they think their elitist and the distro itself is community driven. Gentoo is far more supperior, the community is more professional and doesn't give a shit about what Arch nemesis have to say.

i know your post sounds ellitist to some but you are right

Arch gives its user base an exaggerated sense of competence and importance.

the Arch is just as comfy for me as ubuntu for your grandmother or rhel for enterprise or whatever distro for whoever that likes that particular one

it's the Arch community that's the total cancer

inb4 nick patches

>pic related
is the only reason I hate the Arch 'community'

>people agreeing with obvious bait

never change, Sup Forums

Linux is not a desktop OS.

Linux distros are functionally 99% equivalent for 99% of users and people who fight over them are probably not doing serious work
It's like arguing over what brand of hammer to use but not actually striking any nails

i don't know, but it's pretty bad. but i guess that if i was 17 and managed to install it i'd feel pretty proud too. i remember feeling like that when i managed to install knoppix back in the day

Arch does have openrc

so many kids on Sup Forums
maybe I'm getting old

Tell that to the almost 1 billion people using it as one.

Only Systemd is supported

you're right, it's a kernel

Arch is user driven though, so if the users support openrc, it is supported

This just in, almost 15% of the world's population uses Linux as their desktop operating system!

Arch is the Dark Souls of OSs.

>Shitty counter intuitive design/mechanics
>Designed for people to seem better than others just for doing menial tasks
>Claims to only be followed by people who are the "best" but is really only a handful of nostalgia-fags/elitists
>Takes way too long to do simple things

No, the worst thing about linux is people who take pride in their lack of knowledge.

The worst thing about the Linux community is people like you that keep on hating distro they can't install.

>Arch is too difficult for me?
>"Muh Arch users are elitist nerds that keep bragging about their hobby OS"
>"I'll make threads so everyone can know how much I hate this OS"
>"It- it's not like I want to be part of the cool kids club anyway"

Kek, you're the pollution.

Are you saying that Unity and Compiz are RAM friendly? I had the same problem like that guy, switched to Arch and now everything runs fast as hell. I don't want to wait for Ubuntu's teams to update software. Also, Unity has a long time bug where, after installing a software, the icon doesn't appear in Unity, you have to reboot or log out.

Gentoo is fine for powerful PCs. I use a not so powerful laptop, the compilation would be slow. If I need a software, I want it now, not after one hour of compilation.

Also someone check my trips!

>they can't install
Arch is piss easy to install yet a vocal part of its user base thinks they're some kind of hardcore hacker for using Arch.

Ubuntu does not imply Unity and Compiz.
A minimal Ubuntu is less bloated than Arch.

>Archfags
>not filled with autists

Explain me about the furry diaper fetish than...

Arch linux has never treated me wrong while kubuntu did

You do realise diaper fetish exists for debian and gimp users

So what's wrong with Debian again?.

my impression is the vast majority of arch users have only used arch or installed another distro for a week or in a vm and then went back to arch, since they don't seem to understand basic principles, like why someone wouldn't want a rolling release distro

I don't think so. I have been playing around with it in Virtualbox seems pretty cool so far. Though having a lot of issue with getting any graphical interface to work though.
Other than that the Arch community has been really helpful and the wiki has a ton of good info. No sure what all the hate is about.

What icons did you use for the file manager? I like it.

let me see, you got frustrated because couldn't follow a simple and plain installation guide?

Stock icon theme of KDE plasma (breeze dark)

this, archlinux has one of the best and clear documentation only lazy or extremely dumb people can't read it.

I just like rolling release and don't mind configuring shit with text files, can this retarded meme die already?

Nope, it's pretty nice actually.

also I think arch configuration is generic and simple, debian and others forces users to do it by its way, arch linux is the most generic GNU/Linux with pacman and systemd.

Are you serious?

I had build many LFS and I can tell you archlinux is an slackware with a good packet managment system.

Thanks.

Arch community honestly has been great. However, many new users to Linux or alternative operating systems don't take the 1,000+ warnings made online that "Arch is for Linux power users."

It's their own fault for not having a great time or taking crap for not reading simple instructions. Look, I love new users and I've been there (confused, unable to get sound working, and trying for the first time editing xconfig.) However, entitled users come without respect or are outright rude, blaming anyone willing to come to aid for faults of their own. Yet, each time someone asks intelligent questions or has given a half assed effort in research, I have gone the extra mile giving them help for nothing more than a thank you.

That "also" wasn't even my post

It's very simple.

Either you use Arch or you're too retarded to install Arch.
There is no other option.

t. Arch fag

Why not zenwalk?

sorry dude, didn't want to impersonate you.

I hardly know anything about linux and this is not terribly hard. People need to realize that there is homework with this shit and then it is easy.

Exactly. Documentation is up the ass.

>debian and others forces users to do it by its way
Examples in comparison with Arch please.

I wish Arch had a stable LTS repository.

I really like pacman and the AUR. And the packages are kept well structured in the repos.

No big deal. I agree it is definitely a generic distribution, most of their packages are vanilla compared to changes other distros make from the upstream.

LTS pretty much defeats the purpose of rolling release though.

Why?

I understand why you like Pacman and AUR, but Pacman is essentially like most other package managers. The AUR is special, but creating custom make files is nearly the same. I know it's a meme, but have you tried Gentoo? I've heard of longer intervals between updates. I still wouldn't use a rolling release for corporate systems, but for a home computer, I would do it. Like said, LTS nullifies the philosophy of Arch.

used arch for like 3 years on muh laptop and debian on my desktop.

they serve different purposes. stop being so fucking autistic. op is autist king as well.

/summerfags

...

Nice try NSA

>they serve different purposes.
this is the answer, I love archlinux but i'll never used it on a big server.

It just doesn't fit the philosophy of bleeding edge, vanilla upstream packages, which is part of the niche here anyway. If you prefer something like LTS you are better off using another distro since the majority of them are based on stable repos

...

Yeah, but this is the philosophy of Arch, not of rolling release.

>kde
yeah...

What's been happening in this thread?

The Arch community outside of Sup Forums isn't that bad.
You're just poisoned by going on Sup Forums.

>Is Arch Linux the worst thing about the Linux community?
>A breeding ground of undeserved pride and elitism that pollutes otherwise welcoming Linux communities.

No.

I freely admit I am not at the level of expertise required for Arch yet so I stay with Ubuntu, but ...

- They have a superior wiki and community.

- I have seen a few use cases is production where implementing Arch for core services saved public institutions significant hardware and support costs vs Redhat or derivatives (CentOS) or Debian based or BSD.

this. arch is power user/high intelligence distro

What purpose does arch serve that Ubuntu doesn't?

>
>this. arch is power user/high intelligence distro
For a power USER, bleeding edge is a false decision.

To join a hype train and feel like a leet haxor.

pacman -S simplescreenrecorder

apt-get install simplescreenrecorder

...

ppa:maarten-baert/simplescreenrecorder

So you meant:
sudo add-apt-repository ppa:maarten-baert/simplescreenrecorder
sudo apt-get update
sudo apt-get install simplescreenrecorder
right?

Is there a problem?

Yes, dependencies conflict on vanilla ubuntu

Can you make some sense?

only an archfag could find something to complain about official, signed packages from the original authors