No, Arch Isn't For New Users

So recently on a podcast, the guys and I did a topic basically doing a tier list for the best beginners distro and in there we talked about how ARX just blatantly was not a beginners distro. It's just, it's not. And one of the things that came away from that whole conversation was that there are a lot of people who actually do think that it's a beginners Linux distro. A lot of people think this. A lot of people in the chat when we were live streaming thought this and since the video has been posted, a lot of people in that comment section are like, ARX is where it's at. So what I want to do today is talk about ARX Linux and its feasibility as a brand new beginner level Linux distro. But before we jump in, if you leave a thumbs up on this video, I'd really appreciate it. So first off, two things. Let me just address the elephant in the room. I'm not looking at the camera. Now I often don't and usually it's not this bad. I have a new setup for a brand new camera and it's higher than it's ever been before. I need to fix that and I'm not quite sure how I'm gonna do it yet. So I apologize if it doesn't look like I'm making eye contact with you guys. So I'll fix that in a future video. But second off and actually getting on topic, I think before we talk about ARX itself, we need to talk about what a new Linux user actually is. Because I think that there's some disconnect on what I think a new Linux user is and what other people do. Because I think, for me personally, and from my experience of interacting with a whole bunch of people who are actually new Linux users, is that the vast majority of them are much more of the Linux Mint types than the ARX Linux types. And I'm not saying that to be derogatory towards either Linux Mint or the people who choose it. It's just basically the fact when you're new to something, you don't know what you don't know yet. And until you know what you need to know, you can't be considered anything but a brand new user. It'd be the same if you'd never used Windows before. Maybe you'd been using Mac the entire time you've been computing and you finally switched to Windows. You're gonna have a learning experience or a learning curve rather. It's just the way it is. Whenever you try something new, you have to learn how to do it. That's what Linux is all about. You have to learn how to use it. And some distros are easier to learn than others. And that's just absolutely the case. So when I talk about a brand new Linux user, what I'm talking about are people who are first coming to Linux and have the bare minimum of experience. And the bare minimum of interest in torturing themselves with something beyond what they think their skill level is. Now there are those, we will be honest, who start their Linux career off on Arch Linux or an Arch-based distro. Those people do exist and they can be successful. It's absolutely possible to start off on Linux as an Arch Linux user. Personally, I don't think that that's the best for most people though. So that's what we're gonna talk about. So for whatever reason, I think the basis of this entire argument is Arch install. Because when Arch was hard to install, nobody ever claimed that it was a new Linux, a new user distro. Right? Nobody ever claimed that. But Arch Linux introduced Arch install, which is an install script that's in the TTY. And for whatever reason, that has lulled people into the sense that Arch Linux is easy to install and easy to use. But I don't think that I agree with that at all. And for two reasons. First off, I mentioned it just a second ago, the Arch installer is in a TTY and it doesn't pop up by default. So while there is a wall of text there that will tell you that you can type in Arch install to get an installer, most new users are gonna see a terminal on the first, you know, boot up into that ISO and be completely lost. And even if they do read that wall of text and type in Arch install, you know, get that far, then they have to know what each entry of that installer actually means and what it's supposed to do and what the correct selection is. Chances are they're not gonna know everything. Now selecting a user, maybe a time zone, all that stuff, fairly easy to do. And even if you can argue that the partitioning part of it's not that hard, looking at things like LVM and encryption and all this these other entries into the Arch Linux installer, those things aren't something that new Linux users are going to be very familiar with. The Arch installer doesn't do a fantastic job of telling you what those things mean and add on top of that you're in a terminal environment. You're not in a GUI. So you can't go to a browser and look something up. You will have to get on your phone and do it or just kind of wing it, right? So whereas like if you install something like Ubuntu or Linux Mint or something like that, something that we really do consider a new user distro, you can if you need to go and get help. But also those installers are much more attuned to people who are familiar with the GUI than the terminal interface. So I think when it comes to the installer itself, you cannot argue that the installer is new user friendly. Now is it more user friendly than it used to be? Absolutely! And nobody's arguing that it isn't. But I don't think that you can argue that new users should look at that as the way to install Linux. So that's the installer. The second part of my argument is that the management of Arch, the actual running of the distro, hasn't changed. Now I have Arch friends. So I have a whole bunch of people in my community who use Arch. I have Arch friends and everyone I talk to who uses Arch and is a daily driver of that distro will have told me personally that lately Arch has been very very stable. And I believe them. Arch has had periods of time where it has been stable for multiple months, even a year or so in a row. Like where they just have had no problems. They haven't had any problems with the AUR or pushing out a grub update that messed around with things. You know, they have gone through and actually had a distro that has been stable for a significant amount of time. The problem with that is that it's not gonna last. Eventually there'll be something. And that's the whole point of Arch. Arch has never been Gentoo when it comes to installing something. It's never been Linux from scratch. I know there's this whole thing where back in the day Arch was hard to install and if you installed it you got yourself a merit badge or something. Installing Arch was never the hardest part of Arch. The hardest part of Arch, and I've always argued this, is the maintenance of it. Making sure that when you are installing something you're not installing something that's going to completely break your system. You're always up to date on the newsfeed on archlinux.org or whatever the website is. You're always up to date on keeping those repositories refreshed and all this stuff. There's a way to maintain Arch to ensure that you're going to have a computer that works always. That usually includes making sure you do your updates at a set period of time and that's not like Debian set period of time, like Arch Linux set period of time. You do it once a week or every four days or whatever it is. You can't wait a whole month and even waiting a week or two weeks or whatever can oftentimes lead you to some problems. Not always, but sometimes. It's that maintenance of Arch that has traditionally caused people problems. Installing it is more difficult than it is to install Ubuntu, but it was never the hardest part. It was always maintaining Arch and that part there has not changed. So my argument is that Arch Linux is easier than it used to be, but it's still not for brand new Linux users. Now there are those who are very tech minded who come into using Linux and are interested in a challenge. By all means, have at it. Don't be surprised when you encounter some problems, but as long as you're interested in solving those problems, you can get so. So one of the arguments that I've heard is the reason why Arch Linux is a new user distro is that the Arch wiki is really good. Now I will admit that the Arch wiki is the best source of documentation for any Linux distro ever. I will be very happy to admit that, as long as you'll admit that it's not the easiest thing to navigate. Because it's not the easiest thing to navigate. It's a wiki, which means you have to know what to search for. It's a gigantic database of information, and while it's awesome that we have that information at our fingertips, you can't just go there and get answers. It's not like ChatGBT or Grok or whatever. You have to go there and know what to search for before you can get your answers. And if you are a new Linux user, again, you don't know what to search for. Whereas if you are on Ubuntu, there's a good chance you're going to have some kind of graphical information on what the problem is. But also, you're less likely to actually encounter problems in the first place, because it's more focused towards people who are new users. Specifically more Linux Mint, I guess, than Ubuntu. But still, you get the idea, right? So this whole argument that Arch is now a new user distro is just... It boggles my mind, because it's just so blatantly not. I mean, let me just ask you... Let me posit a situation for you, shall we? Let's just say that the Gentoo guys said, screw it. Installing Gentoo is too hard. We're gonna create an install script. And now there are Gentoo install scripts out there. None of them are particularly user-friendly, but they are obviously way more user-friendly than the traditional way of installing Gentoo. So my question to you guys is, if that situation came to pass, the Gentoo guys created an installer that was basically similar to Arch install, would you consider Gentoo a new user distro too, just because it's now easier to install? I don't think that you would, because there are certain, you know, fussy parts about Gentoo that the new users aren't going to know how to do. Things like how to use portage, how to use use flags, how to use all these things that go along with using Gentoo, and the same is the case with Arch. You have to know how to use Pac-Man. You have to know how to enable the AUR and get to the AUR if you want to do those things. You have to know how to maintain those things once you've enabled them. All of this stuff goes into using Arch, and none of that stuff is particularly user-friendly when it comes to brand new Linux users. So that's my argument against Arch Linux in terms of being a new Linux user. Now let me say this, because I know there are going to be people in the comment section below who say, Matt, why do you hate Arch Linux so much? I don't hate Arch Linux. I think it's a fantastic thing. For years, I was an Arch Linux user. I would have married the AUR at one point. I was in love with that thing. It was so good, I swore by it. I would, at points, would tell you that I can never use another Linux distro because the AUR was so good at just giving me the software that I need. And it still is, and still remains, one of the best things about Arch Linux. If people tell me, if someone came up to me and said, Matt, I need the most software. That's what I need out of a Linux distro. I would say, go use Arch, because it has the most software. Now, it has other problems, but it fills that need, right? So I don't hate Arch Linux at all. I think it's very good. If you are someone who has the ability to install it and maintain it, it can be a perfect daily driver, long-term distro. And it can be very stable if you know what you're doing. If you are new, you're gonna probably encounter some problems along the way. Now, those can be learning experiences, and you can solve those problems probably pretty easily. But still, you're gonna encounter the problems there where you might not encounter them on something like Linux Mint, because, again, that's more tailored towards new users. So, that's it for this one. If you have thoughts on this, you can leave those in the comment section below. I'd love to hear from you, especially if you're one of those people who were in that chat or in my comments on the last podcast talking about how Arch Linux is a new distro. I'd love to hear from you guys, and you can tell me how I'm wrong. And we can have a little bit of an argument, but just remember, be nice, because if you start being an asshole, I will boot you out of my comment section. So, there you go. You can follow me on Mastodon or Odyssey. Those links will be in the video description. You can support me on Patreon at patreon.com slash TheLinuxCast. There, you'll find a weekly exclusive podcast that I put out, and it's basically me just sitting in front of this microphone for 15 minutes or so, just rambling. The latest one was me talking about why I bought a Mac. And, yeah, I am a Mac user now. Kinda. God. I probably will do an actual, like, video on that, because you guys can't see it. It's off-frame, but there's... I'm putting my hand on the Mac right now. That's how close there is a Mac to me. And you can actually see just kind of... I bumped them off, so the screen kind of came on. I don't like it. I don't like it. So, there's your spoiler. Anyways, that is it for this one. You can support me at patreon.com slash TheLinuxCast. I co-feed YouTube as well. Thanks to everybody who does support me on Patreon and YouTube. You guys are all absolutely amazing. Without you, the channel just would not be anywhere near where it is right now. So, thank you so very, very much for your support. I truly do appreciate it. Again, just thank you so very much. I'll see you guys next time. Thank you for watching. Adios, my friends.