Is manjaro the ultimate distro?

It's good distro for everyone. Everything is easy af, it's based on arch and just werks. I think, that there's no distro which can even complete right now.

Been running it for 2 weeks. Survived every system update so far. If (rather when) it stops working I'll go back to FreeBSD.

You know the reason people hate Manjaro besides the embarrassing SSL cert debacle is that it's a distro that takes away all the "hard" work of Archfags and it still gives you the AUR.

>memejaro
>best for everyone
AUR is cancer, though. Same goes for OBS, PPAs and whatever Fedora has.

Just fucking use Antergos if you want an installer, cunt.

I usually build from source. I rarely need anything outside the repositories anyways.

Manjaro is good for no one but /r/linuxmasterrace gamers. Debian, Ubuntu, Fedora and OpenSUSE are the only decent distros.

Just fucking use Arch Anywhere if you want an installer, cunt.

>vanilla arch
>manjaro
>antergos
which one is the best for a linux noob who needs some bleeding edge software?

Linux noob here, I switched to Manjaro from Ubuntu a few months ago. I'm glad I made the switch.

Manjaro can use Arch wiki just the same and it has the same AUR which is Arch's biggest selling point. It also suggest new kernels and you can use a GUI tool to click which kernel you want. I'd say it's pretty good.

I used Slackware, thought me Linux better than others

There's not a single about Manjaro that justifies using it over Antergos

Withholding packages does not make Manjaro more stable. It's literally just a shitty arch build with ugly theming and stuffed to the brim with bloat.

Separate distributions for each DE? Garbage dude.

Antergos achieves everything manjaro sets out to be with twice the efficiency

+1 OP also, I highly recommend others to check out Manjaro-Architect.

It is also a distro that breaks, significantly more often then arch or antegros, which surprisingly are more stable.

Manjaro will never be the ultimate distro while it's still locked by DE. Get back to me when any Manjaro distribution can do what Cinchi does, before then Manjaro is gutter trash compared to Antergos or Vanilla arch

>Get back to me when any Manjaro distribution can do what Cinchi does, before
It already does though with manjaro architect.

Not that I see a reason to actually use it though.

Manjaro gnome is also slow as fuck compared to a gnome installation with Antergos.

Why does manjaro have separate distros for each DE anyways? If it's Arch-based, why can't they just do what Antergos does?

The only justification for using Manjaro over any Arch installer is not having an internet connection.

>based on arch
>for everyone
Nope

Neither. Linux noobs should avoid arch based distros.

Arch is the ultimate distro. Manjaro is a feeble attempt to give it the skin of an Ubuntu clone (with the performance to match)

n00b: vanilla Arch
It's a pain in the ass but that's how you learn.

Experienced user: Manjaro or Antergos it doesn't matter.

AA is deprecated

>Arch Anywhere
Yeah, now it's called Anarchy Linux
What a joke.

Antergos is where you go after you break your first arch install and don't have the patience to set up a desktop by hand again

Manjaro is where people go when they don't understand that the desktop that Antergos creates for whatever DE you choose is far more predictable and stable than what you get with a mystery box manjaro install.

Bleeding edge does not equal broken packages. Arch installations don't break because of problems in the repo, they break because of user related fuckups. Withholding packages makes manjaro no less susceptible. In fact, if you're going to catch broken packages from any repo, I guarantee you it will be Manjaro's bargain bin homebrew clusterfuck

mind to elaborate?
Antergos>Manjaro?
I dont have that time to setup and tweak vanilla arch
would try if I have time

>Antergos achieves everything manjaro sets out to be with twice the efficiency
No it does not. Manjaro is way more user friendly and functional.

Linux noobs should avoid Arch-based distros.

>I dont have that time to setup and tweak vanilla arch would try if I have time
Then just use Ubuntu... Part of the reason why people install arch is because they want weird errors to fix that nobody has seen before. It is bound to crash at some point. All arch-based distros are unstable.

I've been running it on my laptop for 4 months now. Haven't had any serious issues yet.
The only distro I've found that comparably "just werks" is Mint.

>Then just use Ubuntu
Not him but I've tried using Ubuntu (usually xubuntu) several times over the past 8 years or so, and usually I switched distros again within a week because Ubuntu is an unstable piece of shit.

last time i tried it it broke after the first update

>Manjaro is more user friendly than a graphical installer that creates a fully functional desktop of whatever DE you click on

Manjaro has 0 claims to form or functionality. Having hexchat pre-installed means jack shit. From your comment it is clear that you have never seen an Antergos installation in your entire life.

Pic related mouthbreather

Oops, looks like you installed one of the depreciated 'community flavours'

Make sure to only install using the default manjaro provided de :)

>Have stock x240.
>Upgrade chink SSD.
>Install mint. Crashes.
>Install Ubuntu. Crashes.
>Install Antergos. Fuckin werks.
I assume it's some kernel related shit.
One month on antergos. Updating everything on daily basis.
No problem at all.

Because it's always using the latest stable kernel.

No other distro can handle that out of the box and just werk like arch. It's why Manjaro defaulting to LTS is such a tragedy. Dkms exists for a reason so your kernel dependent modules have no excuse to break when you upgrade

Yes

cnchi is absolute shit, couldn't finish the installation with it for 2 whole years
>1040 packages
is that all the gnome bloat?

>based on arch
dropped

>whatever Fedora has
copr or something like that

I use Manjaro, specifically Manjaro architect. It lets you choose everything manually just like normal Arch, but with a GUI.

Manjaro killed itself for no reason for me. Forums are beyond useless (they just ask you the same question you answered in OP already 3 times and then stop replying), and generally there's 0 reason to use it over Arch

Eh, never used Manjaro but I'd go with either Arch or Antergos. Manjaro seems to deviate too much away from Arch, while Antergos is basically Arch without all the hassle (but with less customization during install, of course). Even neofetch shows my Antergos install as if it was pure Arch.

At that point just go with Arch Anywhere.

Antergos is better, literally just click next to install.

Don't you have to nuke the antergos repos and shit after the installation? Ends up about the same.

It's literally just commenting out a line.

From all the distros I've used, Manjaro was the only one that actually werked flawlessly for more than a few months.

Ubuntu was also good, but not having updated software and using PPAs made the experience not as good as Manjaro.

You autists can sperg as much as you want. Manjaro is checking every single box for normal people and it's the true successor to the Ubuntu 14.04 legacy of stability and usability.

Doesn't Gentoo do thst also?

It's pretty good too. I just end up downloading a bunch of software that it offers during installation though, basically the same thing.

Cinchi downloads packages marked for installation of the internet regardless of whether you're in a live environment. The only thing that is absolutely shit is your internet homo

I tried it last week with gnome but icons and preinstalled stuffed pissed me off so I went back to Fedora. Next time I'm either going Arch or LFS but box first.

Ubuntu 16.04 was the true successor to Ubuntu 14.04 in terms of legacy and stability. Manjaro is just Arch shipped with the LTS kernel as default. The only commonality it has with Ubuntu is being pre-packaged with outdated software.

The only reason people shill manjaro at all is its overstated reputation as a just werks way to experience arch. The Antergos installer is just as easy a way to try out arch and doesn't require you to download and burn a different liveusb if you want to try a different desktop. Manjaro has no exclusive software and the exact same fallback options as regular arch for broken upgrades.

Xubuntu

Why does everybody care about bloat on a mainstream Linux OS? It's just less disk space and a few wasted CPU cycles. It's not Telemetry or other invasive shit. I don't mind as long as it's not in my face kinda like Cortana.

Because they are too lazy to unbloat it or something.

>community flavours of a community distro
stop trying to be Canonical

trying out Antenegros, it is quite good!

...

Why does everybody care about toolbars in my internet explorer? It's just less visible space and a few more clicks. I don't mind as long as I can still browse the web.

You'll be there a while, I ran Manjaro for a year in my laptop till i found out about Solus, it's doesn't break as often as you think.

Gentoo is unironically the ultimate distro. It lets you customize it any way you want and it's stable as fuck. There are derivatives like calculate if you need a gui.

Your describing Cotana like bloat. Cortana and web toolbars are in your face. Files are not in your face unless you put everything on your desktop like a brainlet or school teacher. And if it takes too much RAM or CPU, then just uninstall it. Dkpg -r takes less than 10 seconds to type.

umm..it's Antegros sweaty xx

They actually are in my face. If something goes wrong and there's tons of bloat installed it makes finding the root of the problem alot harder.
Only having the necessary configuration files makes maintaining my system alot less of a headache (+gain control over it)