Your point was that users can use arch install scripts to automate some of the setup process.

I countered by saying they could just use a distro that has an installer integrated directly into it.

I also added that in your mind, there is no legitimate reason to use an arch derivative. This highlights your bias.

What was I missing, exactly?

Not at all.

I don’t care about fedora.

Or just use a distro that sets everything up for you.

Seems like anything is the solution except that in your mind, lol.

Glad we have option 😎

Thought Arch was all about DIY?

None, but bugs stick around way longer in debian stable because of how old the software is.

Did you… really think I was talking about a bugless distro?

🥱

Problem with debian is it’s stable in the sense of unchanging, not necessarily a lack of bugs.

He’s saying he wants up to date packages and stability, which seems to mean he was current software without bugs. That’s not debian stable.

I recommend using Manjaro KDE.

You’re not really more likely to break stuff.

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.

Go to each distros respective subreddits and you’ll find way more tech support questions for arch linux.

That entire distro is pretty much nothing but googling.

I like the AUR and rolling-release model.

It’s pretty much a pre-configured arch that’s easier to maintain.

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 :)

Whatever one comes with Manjaro KDE.

Because I don’t really care.

Uhh, no.

You still end up paying more for worse hardware with that brand, regardless of the windows license.

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

Removed by mod