What is your unbiased opinion on Manjaro?

if you want an Arch based distro, Endeavour OS is more popular – Manjaro has had a few issues over the years

I have used it in the past for a few years. I don't think you should. Why?

• The Manjaro devs are idiots. They have broken the AUR on multiple occasions.
• Their packages break more often than upstream Arch since you get update bundles which they release. This isn't tested as well as it should and may lead to things breaking.
• Arch is also easier to install nowadays, if you really want a rolling release distro.

If you just want something not-Ubuntu and easy to use, I tend to favor Fedora personally.

What even is an unbiased opinion? That doesn't even begin to make sense.

That being said, my very biased opinion is that it's a great way to install Arch without learning how Arch works so that when it inevitably breaks you don't even know how to ask the right questions.

Idiot Devs that forgot to renew their certificates twice in a single year. A pm that can break your packages. A treasurer hat gotbfires cause he didnt allow the CEO to buy a 2k gaming laptop. They fiddled with arch so much there is a chance when something goes wrong, its likely manjaros fault.

They are not to be trusted frankly.

Use endeavouros, it makes arch actually usable Instead of a KISS nightmare and doesn't have any of the manjaro baggage.

I never recommend Manjaro, even for experienced users. Multiple times, they've let their ssl certificats expire, and renewing those has been easy to automate for a number of years at this point. There have been a number of cases where they ship work-in-progress versions of software as part of their default install, and there was an open letter posted calling this out: https://dont-ship.it

So in my opinion, Manjaro leaves much to be desired from a project governance standpoint.

Now, using an Arch-based distro that does the install process for you doesn't absolve you from learning what it takes to maintain an Arch install; at some point, something will crop-up that requires manual intervention to get back up & running again after an update.

If that is what you're looking for, I suggest EndeavourOS.

if you want to use Arch, just use Arch

I used to love Manjaro. It looks gorgeous ( to my eye ). Sadly, I now see it as a bit of a low-quality mess with governance issues. Manjaro broke my system more than once. Although I did not believe it when I used Manjaro, getting off of it has shown me that I regularly had AUR compatibility problems as well.

These days, I would recommend EndevourOS over Manjaro. It is just as easy in practice, I have found it to be far more stable. Once installed, EndevourOS is 99.8% the same as a well configured vanilla Arch. It uses the Arch package repositories natively.

Even more than Manjaro, I used to love Pamac and graphical package management. Now I think Pamac is garbage. It has caused so many problems for me. I mostly use yay to manage packages now. A really great middle ground between GUI package management and yay or pacman is pacseek. You have to use yay to install it but, for the times I may have missed Pamac, it has been awesome.

I used manjaro for a long while before I distro hopped and I think it’s a fine distro. Never had any problems with it. People keep pointing to the couple of times when it had some certificate issues. I don’t think it’s very relevant, and I only had positive things to say while I was using it.

I used to run Manjaro, and I can't recommend it for a new user. While the UX is user friendly, the distro itself is not. Ive very often had upgrade and update issues that i have wasted days fixing.

I'd instead recommend fedora workstation as a non-ubuntu option

Wouldn't let it touch my system. Try Endeavor if you want to hop to an arch based distro.

I'm not a fan for a few reasons, but they're all on my end.

I will say, though, that if you "don't have time to always be doing crazy power user stuff," an Arch based distro might not be what you're looking for. This is especially true of an Arch based distro that strays pretty far from the core distribution.

My suggestion would be to try Fedora or OpenSuse Tumbleweed instead. I'm a big Fedora fan, and it's honestly great - much better than Ubuntu IMHO. It's also easy to maintain and less prone to user-induced breakage than Arch distros.

If you're looking for something even more different, but still not prone to breakage, then you might try looking into an immutable distro. Silverblue, OpenSuse Aeon, blendOS, or VanillaOS are all nice places to start looking.

What is your biased opinion on having unbiased opinions?

I've used Arch, Manjaro, and Endeavour. For ease of use it's between Manjaro and Endeavour and I'd pick Endeavour. Arch is great too. When you're ready to go deeper, give it a shot.

It sucks.

I've never used Manjaro, but I've used Arch (I don't currently use it) enough to know where it went wrong. Basically, they're trying to make a snapshot based distro out of a distro that's not snapshot based, and they run into issues because of it. On Arch, if you have an issue, you revert and wait a couple days. On Manjaro, if you have an issue, you revert and then wait, a week? Two? Is there any reasonable assumption that the next snapshot is good? I don't think they have the manpower to ensure snapshots are high quality, so they're merely whatever existed at the time, perhaps with obvious issues fixed.

I currently use OpenSUSE Tumbleweed, which is snapshot based by design, while also being a rolling release. The way OpenSUSE works is by having all snapshots go through openQA, which means all snapshots (near daily) go through an automated test suite. So if something breaks, they'll write a test and the next snapshot won't have that issue.

So my opinion is to go with something release based (e.g. Mint) or bleeding edge (e.g. Arch), but don't try to go somewhere in the middle unless you have a larger team. So either trust your user or your dev team, there shouldn't be a middle ground.

I run Manjaro as my gaming rig and have had no real issues.

My unbiased opinion is that for what it sets out to achieve (no hastle Arch Linux setup) there are better options. EndeavourOS is worth looking at. I'll leave it to others to list the drawbacks of Manjaro's package triaging approach. I'm still having my morning coffee in bed, so I'm typing this with one hand.

I've had more success with Manjaro than any other distro. I've gotten lots of software working because of the great package manager, all using a GUI. I think it's really easy to use and at the same time really flexible and powerful. I've tried to install Arch twice and failed both times. I guess I'm an idiot. Manjaro is easy to install and you get all the power a flexibility of Arch's package management.

If you want to divorce yourself from Ubuntu (and I think that's a good idea myself) you can always run Linux Mint Debian Edition. Since you're so new to Linux, I would stick with Linux Mint as your daily driver and take the time to really learn the command line, shell scripting, process control, and everything Unix-like. Get good with tools like awk, sed, grep, find, and learn about regex. Distro hopping won't help to really learn the ins and outs.

Also take time to learn tools like iptables/nftables, ip route, IP forwarding. There's so much you can learn without distro hopping. Once you become well versed in all things command line, then you can start searching for use case specific distro. I use Arch myself but it's not for the beginning user.

Opinions are always biased.

How is anyone supposed to have an unbiased opinion?

What features of Manjaro would make it something you prefer? A different DE? Mint offers more than just one.

I have several family members and friends on Manjaro for the last several years. I have had virtually no need to intervene with it on their behalf, and these are users with zero linux knowledge (one of them believes they have a Mac because I pimped the UI to look like OSX).

Despite the detractors, I think it's the least hassle distro I've encountered, and I've used Linux for 25 years.

If you want something user friendly and something with good gui support, why not try out fedora or opensuse tumbleweed

I ran Manjaro for a couple of years as my daily driver before moving on to EndeavourOS. At this point I've probably spent an equal amount of time on both distros.

Their holding back of arch packages might sound like a good idea, but in reality not so much. Most of the time the same oopsies slip through with a bit of delay. Other times being out of sync with AUR causes additional issues. Arch stable is already stable, so holding back is just extra work with no gain in my book. Any additional testing effort would be better spent on Arch testing instead of doing the same work with delay.

Sometimes maybe good, sometimes maybe shit

It's like EndeavourOS but with more issues I guess. Oh and green instead of purple.

I've installed Arch, Arcos and Manjaro (from the Arch based distros). Manjaro and Arcos are faster and easier to install and setup compared to Arch. Manjaro has nice GUI to select kernel, GPU drivers and install software (and does not automatically move you to the newest kernel, as opposed to Arch or Arcos). They had fucked up (I think 3 times) with renewing their SSL certificate, and for a short while their ISOs were unverifiable (not that big of an issue if you ask me). Since they delay their packages' updates, running them in testing for a few months for extra stability, installing from AUR is bound to break.

I've installed Manjaro on 3 computers, and worked with it extensively for about 3 years. It's a decent distro that doesn't deserve all the hate it gets.

Was my first distro and used it for years without isses

Loved it

It's not reliable. They try to combine stable with unstable packages and it doesn't work. It's only a matter of time before your graphics get messed up and you boot into a terminal. Avoid.

Get Linux Mint. You'll thank me

Manjaro is a great way for a new linux user to inevitably break their install and have no idea how they did it, then never figure out how to fix it, while breaking it more while trying.

I’ve never installed it, but I know a few people who used it as their first distro, and none of them recommend it, or other arch based distros, and especially not to new users. For the above reason.

Regular arch is better, but I’d only recommend it if you are interested in becoming a power user.

I have been using fedora for a while now, and it has been surprisingly stable and functional out of the box. I’ve only broken my install once in the past two years, and that’s been because I do a lot of power user things. As for new linux users, I’ve recommended it to a few friends who were starting out, and they’ve had great success with it.

OpenSUSE Tumbleweed is another distro that might be good if you want something that just works while being rolling release. I’ve tried it out alongside OpenSUSE Leap and Fedora, but ended up preferring Fedora.

Debian was my first distro, and I’ve enjoyed using it. I used this extensively before I was much of a power user with great success, and I’ve heard many people say great things about debian 12.

I installed Manjaro for many people and have thoroughly regretted it, using it was a battle and over time the install would for seemingly no reason break.

I no longer give people manjaro, endeavor is significantly better. Or the arch installer.

TBH, if you don't have bleeding edge hardware just stay with OPENSUSE Leap, Debian Stable, Linux Mint or LMDE. If you are feeling adventurous, even Slackware will cover your back most of the time and gives you more bragging rights than Arch. Even if you have bleeding edge hardware, you are better off with OpenSUSE Tumbleweed, Fedora and Arch.

Manjaro is just not that stable. It once was the only way to install an Arch-ish system without having to go through the hassle of the official Arch installation guide, but currently there are several options to avoid this guide and still have a vanilla Arch system. That's how I used Manjaro for a brief period. The tools I remember they provide, or even better alternatives, are in the Arch User Repo (AUR) anyway, available for all Arch-like distro users. Maybe the only exception to this is the wide catalog of kernels that Manjaro provides, but an equally extensive catalog is available for Arch users through official and third-party repos and the AUR.

Manjaro is not quite exciting but also not quite stable. I think it's a distro most people get by accident.

Nope. Countless stories of updates breaking everything, developer incompetency (pamac, their GUI pacman wrapper, took the AUR down twice) and a lot more.

https://youtu.be/5KNK3e9ScPo (keep in mind that the treasury thing never happened)

For a more successful attempt at a stable rolling release, try openSUSE tumbleweed. For an arch based solution, try EndeavorOS or Garuda.

Fedora does do a point release model but not nearly as bad as Ubuntu's.

Not really an opinion but I guess an experience - Manjaro was my first ever Linux distro.

I switched to it around 4 years ago and everything seemed to work except that I had this issue where if a game was running for 30 minutes or longer, it would progressively run worse and worse until it either crashed or I would just restart it. Didn't really find any solution online, the issue didn't happen on windows so I just switched back after 2 weeks.

Half a year later I decided to give it another shot, but I had a completely different issue I couldn't figure out how to fix, so I switched away from it 3 days later to Mint. Switched back to Windows a day later because I wasn't much of a fan of apt when compared to pacman, and arch (what Manjaro is based on) is this mythical distro that's very hard to install and use, so I didn't bother.

Then another half a year later I switched to arch and stuck to it, with minor distro hopping here and there but always came back to arch. Thanks to Manjaro, I knew pacman commands and had overcome the fear of the terminal, which did make the switch to arch much easier.

That being said, my opinion is that you should at the very least try it. If the distro gives you no problems - fantastic, but if gives you major issues like in my case, then at least you get to familiarize yourself with arch-based distributions and maybe try EndeavourOS or Arch in the future.

The whole thing with holding back package updates for a some weeks doesn't make a ton of sense to me, especially given that to my understanding security updates are often held back as well. The main advantage over Arch is that it has a graphical installer, but IMO Arch really isn't that hard to install now with archinstall being a thing.

In another vein, they've let their website certificate expire on multiple occasions, and have shipped pamac versions that have ended up DDoSing the AUR on multiple occasions as well. All this hints at some fairly serious mismanagement and doesn't exactly lend itself to the implicit trust required of distro maintainers.

I did use Manjaro for a decent stretch before eventually switching to Arch, and functionally I didn't notice any difference after switching apart from the AUR manager I used and packages making their way to my system sooner. This is a big part of why I say I don't really see the point.

Pick EndeavourOS or ArcoLinux, if you want to pick an easy Arch based distro. Avoid Manjaro.

If you want an easy distro as a newcomer from Windows, pick Ubuntu or Mint, ignore everything else. GNOME as a DE works best, no matter what distro you pick, the distro is just going to play a hand in wanting DEB or RPM based package ecosystem, where DEB wins by a mile.

I've distro-hopped quite a bit. I used Manjaro for about 4-5 months. I really liked it actually. I did end up having some problems after an update, and even with some community help, I wasn't able to fix it. After that, I decided to try Arch and ended up loving and using it for the past 5 or so years.

If you're new to Linux and insist on using an Arch based distro, Manjaro is probably a good choice for you, but if you have used Linux for a while and are comfortable with system configuration, I really couldn't recommend Arch enough.

Both communities are very well established and responsive, but Arch is on its own level. The Arch wiki is really an amazing thing, and aside from some gatekeepers, the majority of the Arch community is happy to help.

I know you said that you don't want to be doing "crazy power user stuff" all the time, but really once you get everything set up the way you like it (it took me maybe 2-3 hours after installation), you can basically leave configuration and use it just like Manjaro and have -- in my experience -- a more stable system.

Up to you, but you seem like you might be comfortable in Linux already, so I'd recommend just going for Arch.

I like it a lot. It gives you the arch experience without the hassle of installing it.

Manjaro is bullshit

Manjaro is training wheels except when it's time to take them off you realize they're super-glued in place

I used to use it on my laptop and found it to be stable and solid. I never encountered any of the theoretical issues people brandish about. The GUI app store was really good (pamac) and frankly if it was included with EndeavourOS it would be perfect and I could recommend EOS to anyone; without the GUI app store EOS really are intentionally limiting how popular they could be. The default wallpapers were a little bland.

I switched to endeavour as when wanting to move away from Ubuntu on my desktop Manjaro didn't like my multi monitor setup (and nor did anything else I tried other than EndeavourOS and Ubuntu). If that had worked I might still be using it now.

The only good think of that distro is their green color.

I'm not a distro hopper, but 6 years ago I ditched Windows and chose Manjaro in the i3wm flavor.

I learned a lot initially and now "live in the terminal" whenever possible and I'm still using the same install.

If you want to learn more about linux, I can recommend it.

lDK if straight arch is better (as i've never used it) but I think I kinda prefer not having a constant flood of updates.

I’ve been running it for a few years. I’ve learned the hard way to not use the AUR. Manjaro breaks AUR software installs with its delayed release schedule. I’m running it now with pretty much all flatpaks and it’s MUCH more stable. So if you do run it, stay away from native AUR and opt for flatpaks instead.

The next time it breaks I’ll finally get motivated, nuke the drive, and install arch again (I liked arch better).

I think I have the skills now to keep an arch box alive, if you don’t have those skills then manjaro won’t really solve that problem either imo. Just go mint or something similar.

Permanently Deleted

It's mostly fine but has had enough issues over the years I stopped using it for my "I want arch but I'm lazy" distro. Arch itself is really not hard to install these days but if you find it too intimidating endeavor is basically just arch anyway but with an installer.

Its ok. The logo looks crap but it has everything I needed already installed where other distros required me to configure or set stuff up. I've had no manjaro related issues over the last 2 years and it's the only distro that hasn't come with an issue out of the box.

Pop os and mint are great I don't think they should be written off just because they're Ubuntu based. Fedora is solid, endeavor and Garuda are arch based and good as well. All the people saying arch requires no setup now that it has an installer are wrong. It will set you up with a barebones system and you'll have to customize from there which can be a hassle if you aren't familiar with linux.

I was forced to switch from manjaro to fedora at work a year ago (we were forced to pick between Ubuntu or Fedora) and I miss it. Things break more often on fedora, I now even lag 1 release behind so that I don't have to deal with breaking updates. I didn't have any problems with manjaro. Still use it at home

I've used Manjaro it went and died on me so now I just run arch

I used to use it. I updated and twice on mobile, twice on desktop, it broke my OS. I wouldn't touch it again.

Mint is great. Your specification is quite restrictive and will potentially open you up to suffering. Mint doesn't use snaps so not sure why you'd want to avoid.

Flawless on my thinkpad T480, occasionaly some issues on my gaming PC usually nvidia drivers post update but not as much lately

I had more trouble in a few month of Manjaro on a secondary system than I had with Arch in over 15 years. The amount of conflicts I had to resolve during package updates was crazy. If I now want to set up a new system, I use EndeavorOS as a base. Quick install procedure but I end up with something very close to Arch.

I've been using Manjaro (XFCE edition) as my daily driver, both on a laptop and a desktop system for more than 6 years now. I've tried many others beforehand: Ubuntu and its variations, Arch, Fedora, Tumbleweed, ...

But Manjaro was what made me stop hopping around. While it's true that it has some pitfalls (e.g. cert issues, AUR incompatibility at times), to this day it's working well enough for me that I don't feel like switching away.

I'm not just browsing web on it either. Software engineering, music production, image and video processing, etc.

Then again, I don't consider myself a beginner at this point and can troubleshoot a fair amount of issues now that I simply couldn't when I started using Linux more than a decade ago.

I also try to:

• not overdo the amount of AUR stuff I use
• read the official forum post BEFORE whenever I run a system update

I also always appreciated the fact that I could get away with not doing a system update for like six weeks and then do a big one (as mentioned, in combination with reading their update announcement). That's always something that didn't quite work for me on Arch in the past (then again, I still was a beginner back then, so most "reinstall to solve this problem" situations back then were on me).

What if Manjaro really would get worse enough so I'd want to switch? I guess EndeavourOS would be an option, because it's very close to Arch, but at the same time, it seemingly offers a graphical installer that hopefully will set itself up properly on a laptop. Then again, I haven't installed Arch in quite a while now. Maybe the install experience has gotten much nicer.

I don't understand the hate. I have been using Manjaro as my sole OS on two machines (a Thinkpad with XFCE, a Surface with Gnome) for several years, and have never had any major problem. Everything just works. The same could be said of Mint (which I used to be on before Manjaro), but I enjoy having faster updates on Manjaro. So I guess, from experience, I am very happy with it.

I used Ubuntu for a month. Switched to Manjaro for 9 months, then went to Artix Linux where I've been for 2 years.

Manjaro has quite a few issues which I think are addressed by EndeavorOS, which would be my personal recommendation.

A rolling release distro does require a bit more attention, however, as you should be updating your system more regularly and you'll occassionally run into dependency issues depending on how many packages you install.

This usually requires being a bit familiar with the command line and how to properly search internet resources to find answers to specific bugs. The Arch Wiki is an incredible resource about computers in general and worth looking into for pretty much anyone imho.

You'll want to also look into using the AUR, as eventually you'll find that you'll want/need a piece of software that isn't in the official repositories.

Never had manjaro running smoothly over a longer periode of time. Sth broke every time i tested.

The themes are awesome

it would be better as an arch installer and a couple of extra packages - not completely different repos

It's ok, if you're willing to read the Forum once in a while and inform yourself before applying upgrades.

My advice, pick a base distribution, and build what you want. Mostly when picking different distros all you are really picking is a package manager, default applications, and a desktop.

If you want to advance in your Linux knowledge building your own will help you quite a bit in learning how it works at the core and what peices are needed to run a system. Then when something breaks you have the understanding to fix or at least properly ask for help. I would especially say this is true if you are looking to switch to arch as your base distribution.

I would only recommend Manjaro to a new person trying to dip their toes into arch but not for their daily driver.

I can't even play a steam game for more than 15 minutes without the wifi button disappearing from existence and never return back

A friend recommended it to mee because Ubuntu packages were hard to edit/create and the versions were always out of date. So I used XFCE and later the KDE edition and had no really big issues (since the forum if something broke always had a workaround). Ngl there were some stupid issues like 3 times (Nvidia GPU user yay!) but other than that the Desktop Experience, Windows Dual Boot, Gaming, Custom packages in minutes were perfect. Pacman is just a beast so I recommend any distro that ships with that.

(This is from the perspective of a Desktop user)

All opinions are biased and I don't like Manjaro!

I used Manjaro on raspberry pi and it worked well however i personally havent used Manjsro in years i still wouldnt use it though because its arch and i prefer simpler distros when i first started using Linux it was Linux Mint, then Kubuntu, then Zorin, then Fedora and now OpenSuSe Tumbleweed im happy with that distro and dont want to change it

If you want to try out other distros without friction, spin up a virtual machine via Gnome Boxes or virt-manager with some different distros

I don’t have the time to always be doing crazy power user stuff and just want something that works out of the box.

otherwise why change whats running for you?

Fedora is nice, not based on Ubuntu, and it mostly "just works" out of the box. The only obnoxious part is having to manually install codecs to play videos.

Permanently Deleted

Mankato is easy to use and looks nice but I’ve also been using it for years. It has the power of the AUR but if people are saying other might be better they might be right. I would just stick to something Arch based because of the AUR. I saw a comment about endeavor and I might try it myself.

I run linux on my gaming rig. I've had the best luck with performance of graphics cards with manjaro and pop. I am not a huge fan of gnome and prefer kde (FWIW, gnome works fine, I just prefer the feel of kde).

With the above in mind, I really like the newness of the packages on rolling distros like Manjaro/arch. Yes, it can break things but Manjaro tends to be a bit behind Arch on releases -- maybe this helps? The AUR is awesome. I also like several of the gui tools Manjaro has implemented to make graphics driver installs simpler.

Pop worked really well and was simplier for gaming -- especially on devices with hybrid graphics.

That being said, I haven't used Mint since the forums were hacked. I haven't used Ubuntu since they started devaluing their users (integrated Amazon?, forcing snap?). Fedora is nice but I found pop/manjaro better for gaming due to graphics support.

My advice to you -- what you are asking is one of the main benefits of linux -- personal choice.

So... get out your USB stick and try them. Use the forums to help you with the nuances and make each work for your needs. Then see what you prefer. Then donate to that project and its base project.

It's awesome to have choice.

Its Green.

It's aight. I like having access to the AUR and Pacman through a nice UI but easy to shoot yourself in the foot if you aren't careful.

The GNOME spin is really good imo. use it on my gaming laptop. Might go to Pop when it gets CosmicDE tho

I don't know much about the console and such magic which probably makes me not exactly predestined for an Arch-based distro with the AUR where I feel like you can break more than in some more common ones like Mint. Despite that, I have been on Manjaro for years now, still learned only the very basics, but have not found a more stable distro that works so well out-of-the-box with some of the newer hardware I have (or had, it's hardly new anymore). Also, I did in fact find the repos combined with careful use of the AUR to be satisfying.

I did distro-hop a lot especially in the beginning of my Linux adventure and was on Mint for a couple of years as well. And that's what I generally recommend to the other non-tech-savvy folks around me as well: Just try a bunch of the top distros on Distrowatch for a couple of weeks. They all have their advantages and disadvantages but eventually you'll figure out what it really is that you want from a distro and which ones work properly with your hardware – and you'll learn about some fixes for common issues which helps the learning about Linux in general.

There are probably folks who know much more than me who can tell you if Manjaro is objectively better than its bad reputation but from my personal experience as a fellow Linux noob: I found it very stable, decently accessible and the KDE spin with its many themes absolutely beautiful.

As Chris Titus once said “why install Manjaro when you can install arch" I used to daily manjaro but stuff broke and if you do decide to use manjaro don't use the AUR if you don't know what your doing

manjaro is my backup os for my primary endeavourOS, and it has never failed me in the last 5 years. one time there was an issue with manjaro lagging behind aur which was solved a few days later and wasn't a big deal. the only reason is not my primary is bc I just like endeavourOS a tad more

Every time I use Manjaro something horribly breaks. It's odd though because I daily drive endeavour now and it's been rock solid with no issues other than my own stupidity in partitioning my drives. I would stay away from Manjaro personally and use endeavour if you're dedicated to arch. If you want a rolling release distro then rhino Linux just released their first major version and it's a rolling release Ubuntu distro. Either way my opinion is the same, Manjaro was good for it's time, but it's been overshadowed and buried by other arch distros that are way more stable.

I have other thoughts, but these are the most objective ones:

• The theme was integrated with all applications I tried and I didn't spot any problems with it. (I'd tell you I liked it, but that would be subjective)
• Installing via Pamac required knowing what source (repos, AUR, et cetera) you were installing from or to try multiple.
• My Brother wifi printer couldn't connect and I didn't find a guide to resolve it.
• I couldn't get audio to work correctly on my Thinkpad X1 Carbon 9th Gen.
• The forums seemed to be active.
• I ran it for a week in a VM without breaking anything. Didn't run for any length of time on bare metal due to the printer and sound issues.

Compared to Fedora and EndeavorOS:

• Default GNOME theming, of course also through.
• GNOME Store will show you all available sources when you search for the package on Fedora. For EndeavorOS I have to search two places on archlinux.org and flathub.
• My printer worked with Fedora out of the box. For EndeavorOS I found a detailed guide they put together.
• No audio issues on either.
• Fedora also has a large forum. The EndeavorOS forum seems to have fewer users.
• I ran Fedora on my laptop for 6 months. When I upgraded between versions, I ended up with two versions of some applications like "Terminal" and "GNOME Terminal," which was confusing. No breakages.
• I've been running EndeavorOS for 14 months. I broke GRUB when everyone else on Arch and EndeavorOS did. I still had the live USB, and EndeavorOS provided instructions on how to fix it, although it was written for Ext4 and I had to make some educated guesses since I use BTRFS. I was successful and that was my only breakage.

You cannot get an unbiased opinion asking on reddit or especially lemmy since this is where predominantly fedora and arch purists live.

What you will see is Fedora users hate Manjaro's popularity because they are in direct competition. Fedora is the downstream of RHL just as Ubuntu is downstream of Debian and Manjaro is Downstream of Arch. RPM and RHL just have not gained traction over the years from new users due to Debian and Arch dominance.

Second are the Arch purists who will tell you that Manjaro is not arch since similarly Ubuntu is not debian. But what happens is you get tons of newbs coming to Arch and in the support forums and arch purists realize that Manjaro has a popularity which makes them jealous. Similar to how debian purists act towards ubuntu newbs .

The thing is, when a big team and community establish a polished down stream service, it will always be more popular and more polished than the upstream since it is building on what the upstream have already provided.

Manjaro is amazing . They really are the ubuntu of arch.

A fedora or arch purist cannot handle those words and will have to find something that happened while back with SSL keys getting miss managed or experimentors who mix a ton of AUR packages with their testing branches etc.

Well ubuntu users screw up their systems when they mix a bunch of debian packages into it. Same thing.

Manjaro to be honesty is frankly killing it. Amazing team and stable rolling downstream arch for newbs. They have three streams, unstable, testing and stable. I've been on stable for years with zero issues. I've got a few AUR packages which build easily . Plus new users get adequately warned when adding AUR packages and mostly it is not necessary since manjaro provides everything in their repos anyways. Installing flatpaks are a sinch and even git packages through the AUR.

The interface is also amazingly polished and I LOVE the ease they give you of installing newer or older kernels.

I haven't used Manjaro in years so my experiences are not up to date, but from my experiences it always felt unpolished and somewhat amateurish compared to other distributions, especially compared to Arch.

I've made Arch crash many times but part of their ideology is that Arch "is as stable as your are". So when I made Arch crash it always felt like a fault of my own.

Manjaro, however, that has marketed itself as a new user friendly distro borked itself after updates just as often as Arch. Back in the day at least. For a newbie oriented distro I don't think this is excusable.

Then Manjaro has done some really weird choices over the years, like with them shipping a proprietary office suite. As well as them not renewing their SSL certs in time for their forum. Several times...

Still, I don't like the idea of point release operating systems so I've always kept to rolling release systems, and if you want a solid rolling release then I have to recommend OpenSuse Tumbleweed. Haven't crashed even once in the 5+ years I've been using it on several PC's and servers (in the form of MicroOS).

Its ok, but the Arch repos are very limited limited and I can't recommend using AUR much.

Better try Fedora.

tbh i never had any problems with it while toying around with it (i'm a debian stable type, anything else is a flirtation) and it works just fine for gamery and such but they have some significant flaws in their operation which makes them unfit for serious computer click clacking imo (im no software nerd or anything, just been using linux since forever). certificate expirations, financial goofery, there's just better distros including rolling with straight arch.

It's been good for me. It has broke a couple of times, but it seemed pretty in par for any Linux distro. For me it was time to re-install. It has a cool package called "gnome-layout-switcher" that mimics popular desktops.

I moved because Debian was somewhat boring, Ubuntu was busy trying to make stuff nobody wanted. RPM based distros were bought by Oracle or IBM and felt like "old hat", ha ha sorry. Arch was the goal but I was feeling lazy so Manjaro it was. I'll probably try another Arch based distro because pacman tools are pretty good.

distro for noobs