DEV Community

Discussion on: Ubuntu is harder than Arch

Collapse
 
leob profile image
leob

Superior in every way, in which ways then? Be more specific, or you're not convincing me.

Thread Thread
 
haxnet profile image
HaxNet • Edited

Just the repos alone is already better

Arch is a rolling release, Ubuntu is a point release.

Did you ever even use Arch? Or installing it turned you away? Because if you did used Arch, you wouldn't be offended(from the sound of your comments)

In Arch, if you run into problems, you pretty much know what's wrong. Because you've built Arch from scratch.

There's plenty of help enough for the average user. If you are constantly seeking for help, then stick with Ubuntu.

Thread Thread
 
leob profile image
leob

I'm not offended :-) but I was just curious about the reasons why it's better ... and "better" is often completely subjective, it depends a lot on your goals, priorities and preferences, what's great for one person may suck for someone else.

By the way, is it Arch based on Debian (like Ubuntu), with all of the packages that come with it?

If someone wants to convince me then I like to hear reasons and arguments rather than just "it's better". And of course there's inertia, most people stick with what they're familiar with unless something else is vastly superior. Most of the time these things are a toss-up and one choice isn't that much better of even different than the other one.

Thread Thread
 
haxnet profile image
HaxNet

Arch is Arch, I know Ubuntu is Debian based.

Honestly, I didn't know anything about Arch. I was an Ubuntu user for a long time. I used all kinds of Ubuntu based distros.

I learned Arch WHILE I was installing it. Lol