Pretty much the title. Where’s the hate towards Manjaro coming from? I was pretty much a Ubuntu/Fedora user for years but never got too technical. Used almost always gnome, but recently got interested in tiling wm and have done some searches and stumbled upon the Manjaro Sway edition and everything works quite well, but I keep seeing people bashing on Manjaro and I don’t know exactly why. So if I were to use sway in Arch or Arco (way friendlier to install) if there any simple way to replicate the makeup sway default configuration?
Thank you all for your time.
Lots of people hate it just because it’s popular and accessible. Some of them are trolls, some of them are being trolled.
All of them rely on lofty argument that have no real bearing for pragmatic use of the distro.
I love Manjaro :)
I use Monjaro at work for my airgapped laptop, because it was the only modern distro that didn’t use Xfce and worked on the T40. I don’t hate it, but I also can’t ever see myself using it as my daily driver. If you do use it as your daily and like it, cool. If you don’t use it or you hate it, cool. For me, all the different distros is the point of Linux, as it allows everyone to tailor the experience to their liking, while still being (mostly) compatibility with each other.
There are multiple types of people “hating” Manjaro to various degrees.
There are the “It GoEs AgAinsT ThE ArCh PhiLoSopHy” guys - those you should ignore without a second thought. Because duh, that’s why it’s its own distro and not Arch. They probably also hate Endeavor, Garuda and all the other great Arch based distros and have no idea what they are talking about.
There are the ones who, like myself, tried Manjaro briefly, realized there was something broken right out of the box, thought “lol stable my ass” and then invested way too much time in Arch on another distro. You should ignore us as well.
There are the ones who at least claim to have proberly used Manjaro for a while and say there is no noticeable benefit, if not disadvantages. They might have a point (shout out the the guy or gal who mentioned their frequent certificate fails lmao).
And finally there are those who have decided Manjaro just isn’t for them and moved on. They can probably give an actually balanced and fair review of Manjaro.
But then again, there are also people maintaining and liking the project, so there seems to be at the very least some perceived value to it. Maybe it’s worth it, maybe it isn’t. Frankly, I don’t care whether people this distro. And why should I?
I also don’t get why a couple dozen DEs exist, when I hate everything but Plasma and Cinnamon, maybe GNOME. But if people want to use them and go as far as to maintain them, there is probably a reason and I have better things to do than stop them.
@UnfortunateShort @jackofalltrades I’m a noob Linux user and I have used Manjaro in the past for about 3 months, i liked it very much. I think people should try it out.
But what did you like about Manjaro compared to other distributions? If I introduce someone who’s never used the internet before to Internet Explorer 6, they might claim to like it very much as well.
@BaconIsAVeg I agree with your statement. I liked Manjaro because it felt a little bit more faster on my potato PC and it that it looked nice (i know you can customize every distro to your liking, but I’m the kind of person that just uses the defaults). Before i used Fedora, Ubuntu 18.04 and Linux mint.
For a few years now i am using openSUSE for my daily tasks and windows for some light gaming (i still have the same potato PC, but upgraded with SSD)
Part of it is the same reason that Debian users bash Ubuntu or Mint users. Why use a derivative when the original works well?
That is a bit superficial, though. Debian isn’t ideal for everybody and neither is Arch. I’ve used Manjaro before. I like the installation process for general desktop use. Easy and straightforward. People who are used to graphical OS installers may be put off by Arch’s approach. I don’t distrohop personally and stick with Arch (btw), so OS installation is a one time headache for every device and archinstall is doable. I think the Arch installation process can be a sort of insider shibboleth for self-identifying linux badasses and a graphical install (for them) is missing the point of Arch. Whatever.
I saw a few posts on edditRay that critiqued the Manjaro team for failing to renew SSL certificates one or more times. That may have led to a perception that the team is not competent to run a distro, which seems like a very harsh position to take.
Also, Manjaro holds back updates from time to time for further testing/stability. This goes against the point of a rolling release distro to an extent, since you aren’t technically getting the very latest software. The tradeoff may make sense for you, though.
You can try copying over your dotfiles if you switch to Arch or Arco. That might be a good start for the overall layout. You might need to install any extra packages used by manjaro in addition to sway for icons, menus, power management, backgrounds, etc.
Arch is about DIY approach. Arch derivatives for “making it easy” are a joke because they defeat the whole point of doing it yourself
Doing it yourself is fine as an educational exercise for newbies, but skilled linux users generally have better things to do than to do the setup by hand for the nth time. On the other hand the “vanilla”/bleeding-edge approach of Arch makes it one of the best bases for derivative distros available, so basing your distro on it is a no-brainer for many.
but skilled linux users generally have better things to do than to do the setup by hand for the nth time.
Had this fine skilled linux user over there heard about archinstall scripts?
Pragmatism above all else, at least for some.
I’m glad we have the option to choose between configuring our entire system or having one that’s configured for us.
There is no one-size fits all answer to computing.
