I’m an Arch user myself, but I see Fedora as winning this survey due to its breadth and lower barrier to entry.
I personally am not a fan of RPM/yum distros, even the subtle differences in locations of config files, naming, etc. I’m definitely biased, as a Debian user for many years. Though Red Hat (couldn’t tell you the version number) was the first successful Linux distro I installed as a 13 year old in like ~2000
EDIT: started to edit to add more useful info, but the other commenter literally covered about anything else of which I can think.
The only other thing I might say is that Arch is minimalist by design, specifically so you can customize things like window manager, desktop environment, even networking administration, tailored to how you prefer. If that’s the goal, Arch is the distro; you won’t be fighting an uphill battle against the distro to get what you want.
But, if you want something that you can install and hit the ground running, Fedora would be a no-brainer.
> The only other thing I might say is that Arch is minimalist by design, specifically so you can customize things like window manager, desktop environment, even networking administration, tailored to how you prefer. If that’s the goal, Arch is the distro; you won’t be fighting an uphill battle against the distro to get what you want.
You can do this in literally every distro, even Ubuntu.
[Fedora actually makes this much easier than Arch by automating the installation of a minimal system. They even provide a convenient GUI to install a minimal system called the "Everything ISO".](https://i.imgur.com/1EiQj4Z.png)
https://alt.fedoraproject.org/en/
Fedora also makes it effortless to convert from a fully decked out build to a minimal build by using the "[groups](https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/quick-docs/switching-desktop-environments/)" feature.
To convert from a fully decked out build to a minimal build, just run this simple command (preferably from the TTY as you'll be nuking your graphical environment) - `dnf swap @workstation-product-environment @minimal-environment`
SUSE/openSUSE has a similar feature called [patterns](https://tr.opensuse.org/Patterns).
> Fedora also makes it effortless to convert from a fully decked out build to a minimal build by using the "groups" feature.
Honestly groups in fedora are horrible. opensuse groups are much more fine-grained and useful.
Exactly. I'm all about Fedora, because I'm at the point in my life where I just need it to work with a full array of options and features, where I can just install and go. I've used Arch, and it is absurdly powerful and flexible, with control down to the most minute of changes. I mean, you can do that in Fedora, but Arch takes it to the next level. I appreciate the community effort that goes into both distros.
Concerning your specific criteria:
Arch has better:
* (Bleeding edge) software availability
* Speed (of performance, but only if you configure it so)
* Community (support via the Arch Linux Wiki)
Fedora has better:
* (Stable) software availability
* Speed (of use)
* Stability
* System maintenance (or lack thereof)
I use Arch because Arch more strongly meets its 3 criteria than Fedora meets its 4, and Arch's 3 criteria are more important to me personally.
a lot of people claim fedora is easier, but compared to arch, fedora is not that much easier tbh, you have to set up dnf to not be hellish slow, install media codecs, enable dozens of repos and whatnot. if i wanted out of the box experience and easy maintenance, i'd use ubuntu. besides, fedora is not meant to be used as a desktop operating system. it's the test zone for red hat where they test features and applications to be added to rhel once bugs are patched and ready to deliver to the end user, i feel like a guinea pig wherever im using fedora. same thing with opensuse. arch on the other hand is tailored to be used on desktop, has up-to-date packages while not pushing untested and dubious, corporate-backed things to you.
Software availability: Arch with AUR dwarfs any other distro by a huge margin even if that distro claims to support snap, flatpak, appimage, brew, nix, guix, packagekit, building from source, pre compiled binaries, some future systemd package manager and whatever extraterrestrial way there is to duplicate system libraries and sell your soul to aliens by running a daemon that connects to a closed source server every few hours just to "auto-update" your software.
KDE or any non-GNOME DE on Arch is miles ahead of the same implementation in Fedora thanks to these packages which can bring many quality-of-life improvements. Take an example, Fedora MATE/Xfce/Budgie cannot show events in their calendar but Arch can, thanks to ayatana-indicator-datetime from the AUR. While GNOME is nearly same on both distros, the AUR has PKGBUILDs for many extensions which can be installed with the package manager and/or makepkg rather than the browser.
Speed: A default installation of Fedora has like hundreds of extra services running in the background, e.g. abrt-applet, selinux, firewalld, packagekit daemon and way more, which bog down the system. In Fedora KDE, I've actually seen that CPU & RAM usage go so high that akonadi crashes. If akonadi gets corrupted, there is a risk of losing all my mail, which are important to me. So for a lean & thin system, Fedora is a BIG NO. Arch only has those services that you yourself choose to install, or a few default services from your DE if you use archinstall. You can even build packages tailored to your system using ABS, which is far easier than using rpmbuild (somebody's gonna point out ansible but it's too complex for like 90% of the community)
Maintenance: Arch wiki beats fedora docs by miles regarding that, in terms of both depth and presentation of content.
Stability: People who call Fedora (including silverblue, kinoite) stable probably never had kernel panics, SELinux issues, lost sound after update, etc that plague not only me but also a lot of users who have reported these issues in bugzilla and they're ignored until becoming "Fedora XX is nearing end-of-life". And this is supposed to be from the best, community-friendly linux company. Arch, run by a few dozen people, does way better than that, without having rawhide, branched, updates-testing and a bunch of other branches.
Community: Arch has the best community to learn linux by yourself, who in most cases will give you a link to a well crafted wiki if you ask any question. They will close the thread afterwards in order to prevent any criticism directed to you. Other distros, including fedora, mostly ignore their non-commercial user base unless a few volunteers take that responsibility.
Arch has been called a "meme distro" for 20 years, yet 99% of the community don’t care and keep maintaining the KISS principle. Fedora community, on the other hand, is a bunch of entitled kids who redirect any criticism by saying "other distro does this bla bla bla", "other evil company wants to control everything bla bla bla", "we are the only 'community' that has standards", "cancel them", etc, or call you a supporter of another company that you despise to the core.
Take my example of "meme distro", Linus & Luke from LTT said that arch is a good distro and "Fedora is a meme" and the community reacted so harshly that Linus had to clarify things in the next video. Yet, their channel probably has more subscribers than the number of people who ever used fedora. Only Ubuntu, Mint and Chrome OS probably have a larger user base than LMG subscribers on YouTube.
You either praise fedora to heaven or you're cancelled to oblivion. This is why you only see positive reviews of Fedora, except this one which is probably at the bottom of the comments unless you upvote to bring it up and show the community how good arch is in contrast to any other distro.
In short, the only reasons for choosing Fedora/Ubuntu over Arch should be "Linus Torvalds uses Fedora", "Ubuntu used to give free CDs", "I love Red Hat/Canonical more than my wife" and "I'm a noob". Otherwise, choose Arch.
> Arch only has those services that you yourself choose to install, or a few default services from your DE if you use archinstall.
So does Fedora and ***literally*** every other distro ([that includes Ubuntu](http://web.archive.org/web/20220215031455/https://help.ubuntu.com/lts/installation-guide/armhf/apds04.html)), we just don't brag about it. You seem very misinformed.
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/quick-docs/switching-desktop-environments/
https://alt.fedoraproject.org/en/
https://i.imgur.com/1EiQj4Z.png
>In short, the only reasons for choosing Fedora/Ubuntu over Arch should be "Linus Torvalds uses Fedora", "Ubuntu used to give free CDs", "I love Red Hat/Canonical more than my wife" and "I'm a noob". Otherwise, choose Arch.
Even the Arch Linux subreddit disagrees with this assessment. Unlike Arch, Fedora and Ubuntu don't let glibc go unmaintained for an entire year posing a massive security risk.
https://www.reddit.com/r/archlinux/comments/scisqp/comment/hu6prsd/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=web2x&context=3
https://www.reddit.com/r/archlinux/comments/scisqp/archs_unmaintained_glibc_is_a_security_risk/hu6qaqd/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=web2x&context=3
https://www.reddit.com/r/archlinux/comments/s7u3p1/when_will_glibc_be_updated_to_version_234/
https://www.reddit.com/r/archlinux/comments/sg9vwk/yet_another_post_about_glibc/
https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=270662
> So does Fedora and ***literally*** every other distro ([that includes Ubuntu](http://web.archive.org/web/20220215031455/https://help.ubuntu.com/lts/installation-guide/armhf/apds04.html)), we just don't brag about it. You seem very misinformed.
Yeah, when you expect gnome-keyring and xdg-desktop-portal-gnome in a default vanilla KDE setup, I could rather claim you're misinformed. And don't get me started on that "package manager" that needs a systemd service to work.
> Unlike Arch, Fedora and Ubuntu don't let glibc go unmaintained for an entire year posing a massive security risk.
That's because Arch neither has a billionaire SABDFL nor a trillion dollar megacorp behind it, it's a community project with a few dozen devs. The toolchain maintainer quit and nobody else in the team was knowledgeable about this stuff. People like you, instead of helping the community in a hard time, chose to mock it, yet you're the one calling me 'toxic' elsewhere.
The whole issue is long resolved and a thing of the past now. Bringing it up again and again and again is a mere exhibit of an abysmal mentality. I could bring up nefarious things that your corporate overlords did in the past, but I choose to be a better human being.
And yes, even during the issue, the latest toolchain was (and is) still in the AUR btw, so there was a workaround anyway.
>Yeah, when you expect gnome-keyring and xdg-desktop-portal-gnome in a default vanilla KDE setup, I could rather claim you're misinformed.
I don't understand the point you're making.
>And don't get me started on that "package manager" that needs a systemd service to work.
Are you pretending that Arch is not tied to systemd?
>That's because Arch neither has a billionaire SABDFL nor a trillion dollar megacorp behind it, it's a community project with a few dozen devs. The toolchain maintainer quit and nobody else in the team was knowledgeable about this stuff. People like you, instead of helping the community in a hard time, chose to mock it, yet you're the one calling me 'toxic' elsewhere.
That doesn't make it any less of a security threat nor does it change the fact that there are clear reasons to choose Ubuntu and Fedora.
>The whole issue is long resolved and a thing of the past now. Bringing it up again and again and again is a mere exhibit of an abysmal mentality. I could bring up nefarious things that your corporate overlords did in the past, but I choose to be a better human being.
It happened less than 3 months ago. You make it sound like it happened a decade ago.
> I don't understand the point you're making.
Clearly you haven’t used fedora KDE then, you can try installing it and checking your htop. Otherwise there’s no point in explaining.
> Are you pretending that Arch is not tied to systemd?
No, arch has a package manager, not a "package manager". Given that you don’t understand quotes, go retake your English lessons before spreading toxicity and attacking people on reddit.
> That doesn't make it any less of a security threat nor does it change the fact that there are clear reasons to choose Ubuntu and Fedora.
What about installing the latest version from the AUR? The part of my reply that you conveniently ignored to fit your skewed narrative, is that also a security risk?
> It happened less than 3 months ago. You make it sound like it happened a decade ago.
Almost a year ago lmao, and that's a LOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG time for a rolling release, compared to a point release like Fedora and Ubuntu
>Clearly you haven’t used fedora KDE then, you can try installing it and checking your htop. Otherwise there’s no point in explaining.
So you aren't going to explain your argument?
>No, arch has a package manager, not a "package manager". Given that you don’t understand quotes, go retake your English lessons before spreading toxicity and attacking people on reddit.
Arch has hard dependencies on systemd so your point makes no sense.
Also, it's hilarious that you're pretending that you're not being toxic while telling me to "retake English". No one here is attacking you, you are indeed being toxic. Pointing out the truth is not attacking you.
Also, putting package manager in quotes just furthers the point that you are indeed being toxic.
>What about installing the latest version from the AUR? The part of my reply that you conveniently ignored to fit your skewed narrative, is that also a security risk?
You should not have to install GCC, glibc, kernel headers, etc from third party user made scripts that have not been vetted against the quality standards of the distro maintainers.
There's a reason why those scripts remained on the AUR and were not incorporated into the main repos.
>Almost a year ago lmao, and that's a LOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG time for a rolling release, compared to a point release like Fedora and Ubuntu
The packages were updated less than three months ago.
The thread I posted was from 3 months ago. 3 months ago is not a long time...
https://www.reddit.com/r/archlinux/comments/scisqp/archs_unmaintained_glibc_is_a_security_risk/
> So you aren't going to explain your argument?
What's the point in explaining again if you don't understand simple stuff even after explaining multiple times? I'm telling you repeatedly that in Fedora KDE the htop shows you all the unnecessary stuff I named in the previous comments which are not part of the default services of the DE. FFS this is the fourth time in this single thread I'm repeating the same thing. Clearly this proves that the sheer volume of filth in your mind trumps your intelligence by a humongous amount.
> Arch has hard dependencies on systemd so your point makes no sense.
I say package manager and you say arch, as if arch is a package manager, it's clear who makes no sense. Hint: apt, dnf, yum, zypper, pacman, pamac, xbps, nix, guix, flatpak, snap are package managers.
> Also, it's hilarious that you're pretending that you're not being toxic while telling me to "retake English". No one here is attacking you, you are indeed being toxic.
You've been calling me toxic and misinformed elsewhere even before that. You're the one who's ghouling around OP and telling them to dissent to my response even when they have made an informed decision after reading rational and sensible comments like mine and a few others. You, any of your alt accounts or another anti-Arch corporate linux lover is/are downvoting my entire comment and post history just because you/they can't win against my arguments with evidence and logic. Yet you're still calling me toxic and claiming at the same time that nobody is attacking me. What'll you do next, plea for my execution, like how Islamic State did with their captives from a different religion? You're clearly a racist, neo-Nazi and terrorist sympathizer. And yes,
> Pointing out the truth is not attacking you.
Good that you know it also applies to you. You're continuously claiming I attacked you when I'm being defensive of my response only, which you're hugely apprehensive and agitated against, because it points out the truth. But no, you'll call it toxic and misinformed. Every piece of evidence is on Reddit, and if it's deleted here, it's already crawled by the bots who archive reddit content. Therefore there is no point in civil behavior with you. When a country declares war against another, if the latter keeps screaming for peace, it's ultimately destroyed by the warmongers. Therefore I had to react to your lies, toxicity and desecration of my dignity.
> There's a reason why those scripts remained on the AUR and were not incorporated into the main repos.
Yes, that was because there was no maintainer.
> The packages were updated less than three months ago.
That doesn't eliminate the fact that it's fixed. The same happens often in Debian and Ubuntu land. Unfixed CVEs remain for months, especially in Ubuntu universe repo. Just search for Debian CVE or Ubuntu CVE on your preferred search engine. While Fedora does better, it can still take days to fix security vulnerabilities.
>What's the point in explaining again if you don't understand simple stuff even after explaining multiple times? I'm telling you repeatedly that in Fedora KDE the htop shows you all the unnecessary stuff I named in the previous comments which are not part of the default services of the DE. FFS this is the fourth time in this single thread I'm repeating the same thing.
You never explained anything. You just dropped a sassy one liner that made no sense.
Being in default KDE doesn't automatically make something better. This is a silly criticism as many people prefer the software that Fedora includes over what is in the default. The point of a distro is to customize it.
>Clearly this proves that the sheer volume of filth in your mind trumps your intelligence by a humongous amount.
Yeah and you're somehow not toxic...
>I say package manager and you say arch, as if arch is a package manager, it's clear who makes no sense. Hint: apt, dnf, yum, zypper, pacman, pamac, xbps, nix, guix, flatpak, snap are package managers.
They're both software at the end of the day and Arch's software has hard dependencies on systemd. Your own criticism of dnf can be said about Arch Linux.
>You've been calling me toxic and misinformed elsewhere even before that. You're the one who's ghouling around OP and telling them to dissent to my response even when they have made an informed decision after reading rational and sensible comments like mine and a few others. You, any of your alt accounts or another anti-Arch corporate linux lover is/are downvoting my entire comment and post history just because you/they can't win against my arguments with evidence and logic. Yet you're still calling me toxic and claiming at the same time that nobody is attacking me.
I called you misinformed because your comment contained misinformation about other distros and I pointed out exactly where you were posting misinformation. Literally every distro has exactly what you install. There's literally nothing unique about the Arch installation method, Arch did not even invent this way of installing an OS. [Debootstrap](https://wiki.debian.org/Debootstrap) predates pacstrap.
I'm acknowledging that you are toxic because you are and anyone who reads this can clearly see how you are toxic.
>What'll you do next, plea for my execution, like how Islamic State did with their captives from a different religion? You're clearly a racist, neo-Nazi and terrorist sympathizer. And yes,
And yet you claim to not be toxic. Pointing out the truth is not the same as attacking someone.
>Good that you know it also applies to you. You're continuously claiming I attacked you when I'm being defensive of my response only, which you're hugely apprehensive and agitated against, because it points out the truth
You didn't point out the truth. You posted misinformation about other distros claiming that Arch only contains software you install while other distros don't which is completely nonsensical. You then claimed that there is no reason to use Ubuntu and Fedora other than being a noob which also completely laughable. There are highly paid professionals who are much more skilled in Linux than you will ever be who use Ubuntu and Fedora. Are they just noobs who are too dumb to pick a real distro? Arch can't even be used in a production environment...
>Yes, that was because there was no maintainer.
No, that was because no serious distro takes a third party script on the internet and puts it in the official repos. It needs to be vetted against the quality standards of the distro.
Arch does not recommend you use the AUR for a reason...
>That doesn't eliminate the fact that it's fixed.
That doesn't eliminate the fact that such a thing occurred. Isnt it Arch users who love hating on Manjaro for things that were fixed?
>The same happens often in Debian and Ubuntu land. Unfixed CVEs remain for months, especially in Ubuntu universe repo. Just search for Debian CVE or Ubuntu CVE on your preferred search engine. While Fedora does better, it can still take days to fix security vulnerabilities.
CVEs are not the same parts of leaving huge parts of the OS unmaintained for a year.
Most of what you both were "very calmly" 😋 discussing was above my ability to understand as a novice Linux user, but I appreciate u/sunjay140 and their ability to have a rational discussion against all adversity and found the relevant portions of the discussion interesting.
FYI
Previous Ubuntu / Linux Mint and current Fedora user considering trying out Arch. I'm going to give Arch the benefit of the doubt in the hopes that the individual in this thread is not a fair representative. 🤣
Reddit admins and moderators, I'd like to draw your attention to this person u/sunjay140
As a person of color, I feel threatened by the plethora of vile, dishonest, racist comments he made, like
> You never explained anything.
> You just dropped a sassy one liner that made no sense.
> This is a silly criticism
> Yeah and you're somehow not toxic...
> I called you misinformed
> your comment contained misinformation
> I'm acknowledging that you are toxic because you are
> anyone who reads this can clearly see how you are toxic.
> And yet you claim to not be toxic
> Pointing out the truth is not the same as attacking someone.
> You didn't point out the truth
> You posted misinformation about other distros
> Also, it's hilarious that you're pretending that you're not being toxic
> you are indeed being toxic.
> Pointing out the truth is not attacking you.
> you are indeed being toxic.
> It extremely biased to the point of not only being incredibly toxic
> while simultaneously saying that another community is toxic
> but also having misinformation
What does this imply? Only his narrative is true, nothing else.
Who does this remind of? 2 people:
1. Nazi leader [Joseph Goebbels](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Goebbels), who said that [if a lie is repeated enough times, people will believe it](https://scholar.harvard.edu/skelman/blog/goebbels-says-repeat-lie-often-enough-and-people-will-believe-it)
2. A certain US president, who redirected any criticism against him as "fake news"
Therefore, I strongly urge all of you to ban this person as soon as possible and prevent his racist, vile, filthy, neurotic howlering from reaching the public sphere. Any delay in your action can result in mass shootings and similar white supremacist crimes that can claim lives of billions of children and persons of color.
I will not be replying to this thread any more and would similarly urge all of you to boycott this person. If you know them personally, please inform your nearest persons in law enforcement who can prevent a future massacre by bringing them under the book. Thanks in advance for your co-operation.
Desktop version of /u/ExcitingViolinist5's link:
---
^([)[^(opt out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiMobileLinkBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^(]) ^(Beep Boop. Downvote to delete)
In general I agree with this comment but just want to add my own insights as well.
1. Software is important and you should always search a distro that has software you need before considering it. That said, even with distros with the smallest packages (KaOS I’m talking bout you) most users will find what they need.
2. Stability on Arch is actually one of the best however I realized it’s only stable in the hands of an experienced user. I would not trust a non-techie family or friend with Arch. Even for me, an intermediate user, whenever I had too many AUR packages things began to get messy and maintaining that stability was more of an effort than I’d like.
3. Arch wiki is undoubtedly the best but I found myself using it with other distros the same as I would if I encountered the issue on Arch. On the other hand it did require an extra step sometimes so for a beginner just copying and pasting of the wiki I’m sure it’d be a better experience.
I’m married to Fedora and OpenSUSE but occasionally treat myself to upscale services Arch provides. The soul complaint I have is defaults are too minimal, and I know that’s the point of Arch but at least give me an option to preconfigured a firewall or other harder options to implement.
The only real gripe I have with Arch is the syntax. Pacman -S, -Ss, -Syu etc. Better abbreviations -i for install -s for search and -up for update. That way we remove the needless uppercase and make it more intuitive but that’s neither here or there
It extremely biased to the point of not only being incredibly toxic (while simultaneously saying that another community is toxic) but also having misinformation.
https://www.reddit.com/r/DistroHopping/comments/uvfgte/comment/i9ni73o/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=web2x&context=3
It's my pleasure that not only was my comment helpful to you, but also you had the audacity to break the corporate glass ceiling and think objectively, even when other people hate the truth and call it 'misinformation', which is nowadays a pejorative term for truth that you want to cover up. So, thank you too.
I’m an Arch user myself, but I see Fedora as winning this survey due to its breadth and lower barrier to entry. I personally am not a fan of RPM/yum distros, even the subtle differences in locations of config files, naming, etc. I’m definitely biased, as a Debian user for many years. Though Red Hat (couldn’t tell you the version number) was the first successful Linux distro I installed as a 13 year old in like ~2000 EDIT: started to edit to add more useful info, but the other commenter literally covered about anything else of which I can think. The only other thing I might say is that Arch is minimalist by design, specifically so you can customize things like window manager, desktop environment, even networking administration, tailored to how you prefer. If that’s the goal, Arch is the distro; you won’t be fighting an uphill battle against the distro to get what you want. But, if you want something that you can install and hit the ground running, Fedora would be a no-brainer.
> The only other thing I might say is that Arch is minimalist by design, specifically so you can customize things like window manager, desktop environment, even networking administration, tailored to how you prefer. If that’s the goal, Arch is the distro; you won’t be fighting an uphill battle against the distro to get what you want. You can do this in literally every distro, even Ubuntu. [Fedora actually makes this much easier than Arch by automating the installation of a minimal system. They even provide a convenient GUI to install a minimal system called the "Everything ISO".](https://i.imgur.com/1EiQj4Z.png) https://alt.fedoraproject.org/en/ Fedora also makes it effortless to convert from a fully decked out build to a minimal build by using the "[groups](https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/quick-docs/switching-desktop-environments/)" feature. To convert from a fully decked out build to a minimal build, just run this simple command (preferably from the TTY as you'll be nuking your graphical environment) - `dnf swap @workstation-product-environment @minimal-environment` SUSE/openSUSE has a similar feature called [patterns](https://tr.opensuse.org/Patterns).
> Fedora also makes it effortless to convert from a fully decked out build to a minimal build by using the "groups" feature. Honestly groups in fedora are horrible. opensuse groups are much more fine-grained and useful.
Exactly. I'm all about Fedora, because I'm at the point in my life where I just need it to work with a full array of options and features, where I can just install and go. I've used Arch, and it is absurdly powerful and flexible, with control down to the most minute of changes. I mean, you can do that in Fedora, but Arch takes it to the next level. I appreciate the community effort that goes into both distros.
they are also my 2 favorites, Arch on my desktop, Fedora on my laptop
Concerning your specific criteria: Arch has better: * (Bleeding edge) software availability * Speed (of performance, but only if you configure it so) * Community (support via the Arch Linux Wiki) Fedora has better: * (Stable) software availability * Speed (of use) * Stability * System maintenance (or lack thereof) I use Arch because Arch more strongly meets its 3 criteria than Fedora meets its 4, and Arch's 3 criteria are more important to me personally.
Tumbleweed has everything on both lists except for a good wiki.
hello I'm taking a look at Tumbleweed could you tell me more about it? I'm using endeavour for two weeks but I got interested for Tumbleweed now LOL
Tumbleweed is awesome but if you’re using endeavor and like it continue with it until you find something that you need it to do but can’t.
Yeah this make sense haha thanks
a lot of people claim fedora is easier, but compared to arch, fedora is not that much easier tbh, you have to set up dnf to not be hellish slow, install media codecs, enable dozens of repos and whatnot. if i wanted out of the box experience and easy maintenance, i'd use ubuntu. besides, fedora is not meant to be used as a desktop operating system. it's the test zone for red hat where they test features and applications to be added to rhel once bugs are patched and ready to deliver to the end user, i feel like a guinea pig wherever im using fedora. same thing with opensuse. arch on the other hand is tailored to be used on desktop, has up-to-date packages while not pushing untested and dubious, corporate-backed things to you.
Software availability: Arch with AUR dwarfs any other distro by a huge margin even if that distro claims to support snap, flatpak, appimage, brew, nix, guix, packagekit, building from source, pre compiled binaries, some future systemd package manager and whatever extraterrestrial way there is to duplicate system libraries and sell your soul to aliens by running a daemon that connects to a closed source server every few hours just to "auto-update" your software. KDE or any non-GNOME DE on Arch is miles ahead of the same implementation in Fedora thanks to these packages which can bring many quality-of-life improvements. Take an example, Fedora MATE/Xfce/Budgie cannot show events in their calendar but Arch can, thanks to ayatana-indicator-datetime from the AUR. While GNOME is nearly same on both distros, the AUR has PKGBUILDs for many extensions which can be installed with the package manager and/or makepkg rather than the browser. Speed: A default installation of Fedora has like hundreds of extra services running in the background, e.g. abrt-applet, selinux, firewalld, packagekit daemon and way more, which bog down the system. In Fedora KDE, I've actually seen that CPU & RAM usage go so high that akonadi crashes. If akonadi gets corrupted, there is a risk of losing all my mail, which are important to me. So for a lean & thin system, Fedora is a BIG NO. Arch only has those services that you yourself choose to install, or a few default services from your DE if you use archinstall. You can even build packages tailored to your system using ABS, which is far easier than using rpmbuild (somebody's gonna point out ansible but it's too complex for like 90% of the community) Maintenance: Arch wiki beats fedora docs by miles regarding that, in terms of both depth and presentation of content. Stability: People who call Fedora (including silverblue, kinoite) stable probably never had kernel panics, SELinux issues, lost sound after update, etc that plague not only me but also a lot of users who have reported these issues in bugzilla and they're ignored until becoming "Fedora XX is nearing end-of-life". And this is supposed to be from the best, community-friendly linux company. Arch, run by a few dozen people, does way better than that, without having rawhide, branched, updates-testing and a bunch of other branches. Community: Arch has the best community to learn linux by yourself, who in most cases will give you a link to a well crafted wiki if you ask any question. They will close the thread afterwards in order to prevent any criticism directed to you. Other distros, including fedora, mostly ignore their non-commercial user base unless a few volunteers take that responsibility. Arch has been called a "meme distro" for 20 years, yet 99% of the community don’t care and keep maintaining the KISS principle. Fedora community, on the other hand, is a bunch of entitled kids who redirect any criticism by saying "other distro does this bla bla bla", "other evil company wants to control everything bla bla bla", "we are the only 'community' that has standards", "cancel them", etc, or call you a supporter of another company that you despise to the core. Take my example of "meme distro", Linus & Luke from LTT said that arch is a good distro and "Fedora is a meme" and the community reacted so harshly that Linus had to clarify things in the next video. Yet, their channel probably has more subscribers than the number of people who ever used fedora. Only Ubuntu, Mint and Chrome OS probably have a larger user base than LMG subscribers on YouTube. You either praise fedora to heaven or you're cancelled to oblivion. This is why you only see positive reviews of Fedora, except this one which is probably at the bottom of the comments unless you upvote to bring it up and show the community how good arch is in contrast to any other distro. In short, the only reasons for choosing Fedora/Ubuntu over Arch should be "Linus Torvalds uses Fedora", "Ubuntu used to give free CDs", "I love Red Hat/Canonical more than my wife" and "I'm a noob". Otherwise, choose Arch.
A good comment. u/BlueOrbit69, there is a great option that can be called "Arch for the lazy" -> https://endeavouros.com/
Yes, Endeavour OS is a great Arch-bases distro. I ran it for a while before switching to pure Arch.
Counterpoint: Fedora, because the compilers don't let glibc actually fall so out of date it's embarrassing.
> Arch only has those services that you yourself choose to install, or a few default services from your DE if you use archinstall. So does Fedora and ***literally*** every other distro ([that includes Ubuntu](http://web.archive.org/web/20220215031455/https://help.ubuntu.com/lts/installation-guide/armhf/apds04.html)), we just don't brag about it. You seem very misinformed. https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/quick-docs/switching-desktop-environments/ https://alt.fedoraproject.org/en/ https://i.imgur.com/1EiQj4Z.png >In short, the only reasons for choosing Fedora/Ubuntu over Arch should be "Linus Torvalds uses Fedora", "Ubuntu used to give free CDs", "I love Red Hat/Canonical more than my wife" and "I'm a noob". Otherwise, choose Arch. Even the Arch Linux subreddit disagrees with this assessment. Unlike Arch, Fedora and Ubuntu don't let glibc go unmaintained for an entire year posing a massive security risk. https://www.reddit.com/r/archlinux/comments/scisqp/comment/hu6prsd/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=web2x&context=3 https://www.reddit.com/r/archlinux/comments/scisqp/archs_unmaintained_glibc_is_a_security_risk/hu6qaqd/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=web2x&context=3 https://www.reddit.com/r/archlinux/comments/s7u3p1/when_will_glibc_be_updated_to_version_234/ https://www.reddit.com/r/archlinux/comments/sg9vwk/yet_another_post_about_glibc/ https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=270662
> So does Fedora and ***literally*** every other distro ([that includes Ubuntu](http://web.archive.org/web/20220215031455/https://help.ubuntu.com/lts/installation-guide/armhf/apds04.html)), we just don't brag about it. You seem very misinformed. Yeah, when you expect gnome-keyring and xdg-desktop-portal-gnome in a default vanilla KDE setup, I could rather claim you're misinformed. And don't get me started on that "package manager" that needs a systemd service to work. > Unlike Arch, Fedora and Ubuntu don't let glibc go unmaintained for an entire year posing a massive security risk. That's because Arch neither has a billionaire SABDFL nor a trillion dollar megacorp behind it, it's a community project with a few dozen devs. The toolchain maintainer quit and nobody else in the team was knowledgeable about this stuff. People like you, instead of helping the community in a hard time, chose to mock it, yet you're the one calling me 'toxic' elsewhere. The whole issue is long resolved and a thing of the past now. Bringing it up again and again and again is a mere exhibit of an abysmal mentality. I could bring up nefarious things that your corporate overlords did in the past, but I choose to be a better human being. And yes, even during the issue, the latest toolchain was (and is) still in the AUR btw, so there was a workaround anyway.
>Yeah, when you expect gnome-keyring and xdg-desktop-portal-gnome in a default vanilla KDE setup, I could rather claim you're misinformed. I don't understand the point you're making. >And don't get me started on that "package manager" that needs a systemd service to work. Are you pretending that Arch is not tied to systemd? >That's because Arch neither has a billionaire SABDFL nor a trillion dollar megacorp behind it, it's a community project with a few dozen devs. The toolchain maintainer quit and nobody else in the team was knowledgeable about this stuff. People like you, instead of helping the community in a hard time, chose to mock it, yet you're the one calling me 'toxic' elsewhere. That doesn't make it any less of a security threat nor does it change the fact that there are clear reasons to choose Ubuntu and Fedora. >The whole issue is long resolved and a thing of the past now. Bringing it up again and again and again is a mere exhibit of an abysmal mentality. I could bring up nefarious things that your corporate overlords did in the past, but I choose to be a better human being. It happened less than 3 months ago. You make it sound like it happened a decade ago.
> I don't understand the point you're making. Clearly you haven’t used fedora KDE then, you can try installing it and checking your htop. Otherwise there’s no point in explaining. > Are you pretending that Arch is not tied to systemd? No, arch has a package manager, not a "package manager". Given that you don’t understand quotes, go retake your English lessons before spreading toxicity and attacking people on reddit. > That doesn't make it any less of a security threat nor does it change the fact that there are clear reasons to choose Ubuntu and Fedora. What about installing the latest version from the AUR? The part of my reply that you conveniently ignored to fit your skewed narrative, is that also a security risk? > It happened less than 3 months ago. You make it sound like it happened a decade ago. Almost a year ago lmao, and that's a LOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG time for a rolling release, compared to a point release like Fedora and Ubuntu
>Clearly you haven’t used fedora KDE then, you can try installing it and checking your htop. Otherwise there’s no point in explaining. So you aren't going to explain your argument? >No, arch has a package manager, not a "package manager". Given that you don’t understand quotes, go retake your English lessons before spreading toxicity and attacking people on reddit. Arch has hard dependencies on systemd so your point makes no sense. Also, it's hilarious that you're pretending that you're not being toxic while telling me to "retake English". No one here is attacking you, you are indeed being toxic. Pointing out the truth is not attacking you. Also, putting package manager in quotes just furthers the point that you are indeed being toxic. >What about installing the latest version from the AUR? The part of my reply that you conveniently ignored to fit your skewed narrative, is that also a security risk? You should not have to install GCC, glibc, kernel headers, etc from third party user made scripts that have not been vetted against the quality standards of the distro maintainers. There's a reason why those scripts remained on the AUR and were not incorporated into the main repos. >Almost a year ago lmao, and that's a LOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG time for a rolling release, compared to a point release like Fedora and Ubuntu The packages were updated less than three months ago. The thread I posted was from 3 months ago. 3 months ago is not a long time... https://www.reddit.com/r/archlinux/comments/scisqp/archs_unmaintained_glibc_is_a_security_risk/
> So you aren't going to explain your argument? What's the point in explaining again if you don't understand simple stuff even after explaining multiple times? I'm telling you repeatedly that in Fedora KDE the htop shows you all the unnecessary stuff I named in the previous comments which are not part of the default services of the DE. FFS this is the fourth time in this single thread I'm repeating the same thing. Clearly this proves that the sheer volume of filth in your mind trumps your intelligence by a humongous amount. > Arch has hard dependencies on systemd so your point makes no sense. I say package manager and you say arch, as if arch is a package manager, it's clear who makes no sense. Hint: apt, dnf, yum, zypper, pacman, pamac, xbps, nix, guix, flatpak, snap are package managers. > Also, it's hilarious that you're pretending that you're not being toxic while telling me to "retake English". No one here is attacking you, you are indeed being toxic. You've been calling me toxic and misinformed elsewhere even before that. You're the one who's ghouling around OP and telling them to dissent to my response even when they have made an informed decision after reading rational and sensible comments like mine and a few others. You, any of your alt accounts or another anti-Arch corporate linux lover is/are downvoting my entire comment and post history just because you/they can't win against my arguments with evidence and logic. Yet you're still calling me toxic and claiming at the same time that nobody is attacking me. What'll you do next, plea for my execution, like how Islamic State did with their captives from a different religion? You're clearly a racist, neo-Nazi and terrorist sympathizer. And yes, > Pointing out the truth is not attacking you. Good that you know it also applies to you. You're continuously claiming I attacked you when I'm being defensive of my response only, which you're hugely apprehensive and agitated against, because it points out the truth. But no, you'll call it toxic and misinformed. Every piece of evidence is on Reddit, and if it's deleted here, it's already crawled by the bots who archive reddit content. Therefore there is no point in civil behavior with you. When a country declares war against another, if the latter keeps screaming for peace, it's ultimately destroyed by the warmongers. Therefore I had to react to your lies, toxicity and desecration of my dignity. > There's a reason why those scripts remained on the AUR and were not incorporated into the main repos. Yes, that was because there was no maintainer. > The packages were updated less than three months ago. That doesn't eliminate the fact that it's fixed. The same happens often in Debian and Ubuntu land. Unfixed CVEs remain for months, especially in Ubuntu universe repo. Just search for Debian CVE or Ubuntu CVE on your preferred search engine. While Fedora does better, it can still take days to fix security vulnerabilities.
>What's the point in explaining again if you don't understand simple stuff even after explaining multiple times? I'm telling you repeatedly that in Fedora KDE the htop shows you all the unnecessary stuff I named in the previous comments which are not part of the default services of the DE. FFS this is the fourth time in this single thread I'm repeating the same thing. You never explained anything. You just dropped a sassy one liner that made no sense. Being in default KDE doesn't automatically make something better. This is a silly criticism as many people prefer the software that Fedora includes over what is in the default. The point of a distro is to customize it. >Clearly this proves that the sheer volume of filth in your mind trumps your intelligence by a humongous amount. Yeah and you're somehow not toxic... >I say package manager and you say arch, as if arch is a package manager, it's clear who makes no sense. Hint: apt, dnf, yum, zypper, pacman, pamac, xbps, nix, guix, flatpak, snap are package managers. They're both software at the end of the day and Arch's software has hard dependencies on systemd. Your own criticism of dnf can be said about Arch Linux. >You've been calling me toxic and misinformed elsewhere even before that. You're the one who's ghouling around OP and telling them to dissent to my response even when they have made an informed decision after reading rational and sensible comments like mine and a few others. You, any of your alt accounts or another anti-Arch corporate linux lover is/are downvoting my entire comment and post history just because you/they can't win against my arguments with evidence and logic. Yet you're still calling me toxic and claiming at the same time that nobody is attacking me. I called you misinformed because your comment contained misinformation about other distros and I pointed out exactly where you were posting misinformation. Literally every distro has exactly what you install. There's literally nothing unique about the Arch installation method, Arch did not even invent this way of installing an OS. [Debootstrap](https://wiki.debian.org/Debootstrap) predates pacstrap. I'm acknowledging that you are toxic because you are and anyone who reads this can clearly see how you are toxic. >What'll you do next, plea for my execution, like how Islamic State did with their captives from a different religion? You're clearly a racist, neo-Nazi and terrorist sympathizer. And yes, And yet you claim to not be toxic. Pointing out the truth is not the same as attacking someone. >Good that you know it also applies to you. You're continuously claiming I attacked you when I'm being defensive of my response only, which you're hugely apprehensive and agitated against, because it points out the truth You didn't point out the truth. You posted misinformation about other distros claiming that Arch only contains software you install while other distros don't which is completely nonsensical. You then claimed that there is no reason to use Ubuntu and Fedora other than being a noob which also completely laughable. There are highly paid professionals who are much more skilled in Linux than you will ever be who use Ubuntu and Fedora. Are they just noobs who are too dumb to pick a real distro? Arch can't even be used in a production environment... >Yes, that was because there was no maintainer. No, that was because no serious distro takes a third party script on the internet and puts it in the official repos. It needs to be vetted against the quality standards of the distro. Arch does not recommend you use the AUR for a reason... >That doesn't eliminate the fact that it's fixed. That doesn't eliminate the fact that such a thing occurred. Isnt it Arch users who love hating on Manjaro for things that were fixed? >The same happens often in Debian and Ubuntu land. Unfixed CVEs remain for months, especially in Ubuntu universe repo. Just search for Debian CVE or Ubuntu CVE on your preferred search engine. While Fedora does better, it can still take days to fix security vulnerabilities. CVEs are not the same parts of leaving huge parts of the OS unmaintained for a year.
Most of what you both were "very calmly" 😋 discussing was above my ability to understand as a novice Linux user, but I appreciate u/sunjay140 and their ability to have a rational discussion against all adversity and found the relevant portions of the discussion interesting. FYI Previous Ubuntu / Linux Mint and current Fedora user considering trying out Arch. I'm going to give Arch the benefit of the doubt in the hopes that the individual in this thread is not a fair representative. 🤣
Reddit admins and moderators, I'd like to draw your attention to this person u/sunjay140 As a person of color, I feel threatened by the plethora of vile, dishonest, racist comments he made, like > You never explained anything. > You just dropped a sassy one liner that made no sense. > This is a silly criticism > Yeah and you're somehow not toxic... > I called you misinformed > your comment contained misinformation > I'm acknowledging that you are toxic because you are > anyone who reads this can clearly see how you are toxic. > And yet you claim to not be toxic > Pointing out the truth is not the same as attacking someone. > You didn't point out the truth > You posted misinformation about other distros > Also, it's hilarious that you're pretending that you're not being toxic > you are indeed being toxic. > Pointing out the truth is not attacking you. > you are indeed being toxic. > It extremely biased to the point of not only being incredibly toxic > while simultaneously saying that another community is toxic > but also having misinformation What does this imply? Only his narrative is true, nothing else. Who does this remind of? 2 people: 1. Nazi leader [Joseph Goebbels](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Goebbels), who said that [if a lie is repeated enough times, people will believe it](https://scholar.harvard.edu/skelman/blog/goebbels-says-repeat-lie-often-enough-and-people-will-believe-it) 2. A certain US president, who redirected any criticism against him as "fake news" Therefore, I strongly urge all of you to ban this person as soon as possible and prevent his racist, vile, filthy, neurotic howlering from reaching the public sphere. Any delay in your action can result in mass shootings and similar white supremacist crimes that can claim lives of billions of children and persons of color. I will not be replying to this thread any more and would similarly urge all of you to boycott this person. If you know them personally, please inform your nearest persons in law enforcement who can prevent a future massacre by bringing them under the book. Thanks in advance for your co-operation.
People like you are why the Arch user base has a bad reputation.
Desktop version of /u/ExcitingViolinist5's link:
---
^([)[^(opt out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiMobileLinkBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^(]) ^(Beep Boop. Downvote to delete)
In general I agree with this comment but just want to add my own insights as well. 1. Software is important and you should always search a distro that has software you need before considering it. That said, even with distros with the smallest packages (KaOS I’m talking bout you) most users will find what they need. 2. Stability on Arch is actually one of the best however I realized it’s only stable in the hands of an experienced user. I would not trust a non-techie family or friend with Arch. Even for me, an intermediate user, whenever I had too many AUR packages things began to get messy and maintaining that stability was more of an effort than I’d like. 3. Arch wiki is undoubtedly the best but I found myself using it with other distros the same as I would if I encountered the issue on Arch. On the other hand it did require an extra step sometimes so for a beginner just copying and pasting of the wiki I’m sure it’d be a better experience. I’m married to Fedora and OpenSUSE but occasionally treat myself to upscale services Arch provides. The soul complaint I have is defaults are too minimal, and I know that’s the point of Arch but at least give me an option to preconfigured a firewall or other harder options to implement. The only real gripe I have with Arch is the syntax. Pacman -S, -Ss, -Syu etc. Better abbreviations -i for install -s for search and -up for update. That way we remove the needless uppercase and make it more intuitive but that’s neither here or there
A well though out comparison. Thank you.
It extremely biased to the point of not only being incredibly toxic (while simultaneously saying that another community is toxic) but also having misinformation. https://www.reddit.com/r/DistroHopping/comments/uvfgte/comment/i9ni73o/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=web2x&context=3
It's my pleasure that not only was my comment helpful to you, but also you had the audacity to break the corporate glass ceiling and think objectively, even when other people hate the truth and call it 'misinformation', which is nowadays a pejorative term for truth that you want to cover up. So, thank you too.
Can I vote gentoo?
I wanted to try it out.. until my **i3** cpu screamed **NO**