Spend 30 minutes installing and configuring arch

>spend 30 minutes installing and configuring arch
>spend 2 hours fixing stuff that broke for some reason
>spend another 30 minutes fixing fonts so it's somewhat bearable
what a fucking waste of time and I don't even enjoy using it

Other urls found in this thread:

pastebin.com/rnDtdzt5
i.imgur.com/SM1gH6p.png
i.imgur.com/P6ZFvJn.png
i.imgur.com/NgXzDTA.png
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

>Spend 20 minutes installing Arch
>Spend 15 minutes setting up sound, xorg, and GNOME
>proeceed to use it for 2 years with no problems
idk OP you may just be retarded, they make macs for people like you and there's no shame in using those.

I've always wondered, is that skinny Vanessa Blake?

Arch isn't for everybody I personal like Manjaro Linux but if you don't like that there's always Antergos which is pretty much vanilla arch with a installer

>Spend 10 minutes installing Windows
>Everything works

>used gnome for two years
>no problems

sounds like stockholm syndrome

It was GNOME 2.0.

Having no problems with Arch for two years is hard to believe.
And even if it's true, it's still shit compared with ubuntu, debian and red hat.

>spend 10 minutes install windows
>spend 5 hours updating
I'm not even a lincucks user.

can confirm

that pretty much sums up my Arch experience
you forgot last bullet point though

> have Arch computer running for 2 years wihtout any problems whatsoever

As much as people hate on MS for pointlessly changing shit in each Windows version, you gotta give them props for maintaining the same terribly slow update process for the past decade. It ain't easy being so incompetent.

err, I use GNOME now, I hopped around DEs a lot before finally settling down and sticking with GNOME. I meant that it takes a minimal amount of time to install and setup.

There's nothing hard about it. I update several times a week, but I always check the front page of archlinux.org before doing it, because they'll let you know if an update requires you to directly intervene in order to update smoothly. To me, that's preferable to maintaining Ubuntu, where I've actually had updates break something, and I've also been through a few dist-upgrades (I started using Ubuntu in 2008.) Arch's rolling-release model removes any need to reinstall the system every few years, just update often and stay informed. Smooth sailing here.

>Spend 10 minutes installing Windows
>spend another 3 hours debloating everything and fixing the shitfest that is the UI

>spend the rest of your life having it restart to install updates, and keep you from using it while it installs updates
>unless you disable critical security updates that Windows actually needs because it's an insecure mess designed by pajeets

>install ubuntu in 30-45 minutes
>breaks after one dist-upgrade

>install arch in 30 minutes
>use it for years with no problem

I don't know where this arch is hard to install/maintain meme comes from

It comes from people that never used it. Debian fags with baby-duck syndrome. Just update regularly and stay informed, it's not hard at all. In some ways, it's easier to use than distros like Ubuntu. I can't really think of any distro that gives you a similar level of simplicity while allowing you to maintain control over what kind of system you end up with, except for the Debian minimal install.

Now swap the distros and keep the rest and you get other people's experiences. Not everyone but it's not identical to all users if it Werks for you, autist. You can stop wondering now.

What is the point of this thread then?

I have Win10 updates disabled, and have never had problem with security. I just fucking hate the bloat and the UI with a passion.

bait

I willingly fall for it every time to let people know that the Sup Forums memes are false and that arch is probably one of the most pleasant, if not the most pleasant experience you can have with Guhnoo PLUS Linooks in the current year.

You're braver than me

>metro
I really liked the UI for Windows 8.1 It was more convenient to have a bunch of tiles showing your programs, organized the way you want. I liked that better than the start menu, plus desktop icons just feel like clutter to me

>Spend 0 seconds installing macOS because it was completely installed and configured on my Apple iMac out of the box
>Start using my computer immediately with no problems whatsoever

underrated

I like Linux and use Windows sometimes, but why does Sup Forums hate convenience so much

Fucking love it

I view maintaining an Arch install as a learning experience. I have it on my everyday carry laptop.

>Software doesn't work properly even though pacman installed all the dependencies.
>Spend 2 hours searching Google.
>Find answer in a mailing list from 2012.
>Install some packages random packages.
>Edit a some config files I had no idea existed.
>Fix issue and learn a few things on the way.

For important shit, I have a Xbuntu laptop.

>use Ubuntu
>shit breaks every few weeks and I have no idea how to fix it
>use Arch
>wiki walks me through everything
>it just werks

Really makes me think

What was the software?

I think the most recent software installation fuckups were Anki or some video drivers. Anki wasn't playing nice with the Python 2.7 install and the video drivers made my display very dim.

Sup Forums hates convenience because more convenience means less control and more botnet.
If you weren't a tech illiterate nigger you would despise being treated like one.

...

Any tips for what you did to make the fonts better, especially in web browsers? I've installed the popular TTF packages as well as copied across the windows fonts and it still looks like as. Le Reddit home page for example looks like ass.

- Creating an Infinality-like font configuration for Arch -
(pic related)

From a clean slate on Arch we can now create a similar font configuration to the infinality-bundle's without having to use the patched packages. It is now possible to easily get great-looking results with the default interpreter.

1. Create the following symlinks to instruct freetype2 to use good-looking rendering defaults
sudo ln -s /etc/fonts/conf.avail/11-lcdfilter-default.conf /etc/fonts/conf.d
sudo ln -s /etc/fonts/conf.avail/10-sub-pixel-rgb.conf /etc/fonts/conf.d

2. Modify (or create) /etc/fonts/local.conf to contain these contents: pastebin.com/rnDtdzt5

3. At this point your fonts should look pretty good and this is a fine place to stop. BUT we can do even better by making sure that we have all fonts on the system that were defined as substitutions earlier. To do this we need to install the packages fonts-meta-extended-lt and fonts-meta-base from the AUR which will build the rest of the fonts required.

After having done all this, restarting the X-server by logging out and back in should apply all changes.

-Screenshots-
Linux - Wikipedia: i.imgur.com/SM1gH6p.png
Github - i.imgur.com/P6ZFvJn.png
Arch website - i.imgur.com/NgXzDTA.png

Looks fine to me

Arch with Ubuntu are the easiest distros to use, if you can't use arch youre pretty dumb.

Quality, cheers

Looks pretty good user.

>I have Win10 updates disabled, and have never had problem with security
the most insecure operating system on earth and you won't apply patches to your system when vulnerabilities are discovered that can be exploited to take control of your machine? jesus h christ you faggot