I’m convinced Arch with archinstall is the easiest Linux to use for users competent with computers. It just requires that the user isn’t afraid of command line interfaces.
I’ve tried the Mint, Ubuntu and uBlue. Had something go wrong with each. Mint didn’t install graphics drivers, Ubuntu had nonsensical design with snap and uBlue corrupted the boot order after a month.
With distros designed to just work it isn’t easy to fix issues when they come up. With Arch there’s no expectation that things work by default, so when something goes wrong you can just make it work again.
On one hand I still believe what I said above and what you just said to be true… You can’t mess up Arch in a way you can’t recover. On the other hand I wish I didn’t dread updating my system because every time I update some random program manages to break.
I’m convinced Arch with archinstall is the easiest Linux to use for users competent with computers. It just requires that the user isn’t afraid of command line interfaces.
I’ve tried the Mint, Ubuntu and uBlue. Had something go wrong with each. Mint didn’t install graphics drivers, Ubuntu had nonsensical design with snap and uBlue corrupted the boot order after a month.
With distros designed to just work it isn’t easy to fix issues when they come up. With Arch there’s no expectation that things work by default, so when something goes wrong you can just make it work again.
I have the same experience with Arch. It just works. When it doesn’t, you forgot to read https://archlinux.org/news/ before sudo pacman -Syu
On one hand I still believe what I said above and what you just said to be true… You can’t mess up Arch in a way you can’t recover. On the other hand I wish I didn’t dread updating my system because every time I update some random program manages to break.