When I made a new linux install I chose Arch. I think for me the reasoning is thus. While I have a LOT of experience with unborking server linux installs, with desktop it’s just a pain to deal with. I previously used Manjaro which, while very easy to install, does obfuscate a lot of what happens behind the scenes. When it goes wrong, personally I found it harder to fix.
With Arch, beyond enough to give me a terminal and basic gnu tools, I’ve chosen what I install from then on. I think that means when things go wrong there’s a much higher chance I’ll know what it is and how to solve it.
Time will tell if this plan works out or not though :P
I’ve had the same path as you. Arch has been the simplest distro I’ve tried. And with archinstall it’s a breeze.
I’ve also found that Plasma 6 takes away most of the hassle with setting up a desktop - for my use case.
Been using a PC since Win 3.1 and it’s by far the most stable system I’ve ever had
When I made a new linux install I chose Arch. I think for me the reasoning is thus. While I have a LOT of experience with unborking server linux installs, with desktop it’s just a pain to deal with. I previously used Manjaro which, while very easy to install, does obfuscate a lot of what happens behind the scenes. When it goes wrong, personally I found it harder to fix.
With Arch, beyond enough to give me a terminal and basic gnu tools, I’ve chosen what I install from then on. I think that means when things go wrong there’s a much higher chance I’ll know what it is and how to solve it.
Time will tell if this plan works out or not though :P
I’ve had the same path as you. Arch has been the simplest distro I’ve tried. And with archinstall it’s a breeze.
I’ve also found that Plasma 6 takes away most of the hassle with setting up a desktop - for my use case.
Been using a PC since Win 3.1 and it’s by far the most stable system I’ve ever had