PS. This is not a critique to Debian-based distros. And i'm not suggesting you to skip Ubintu for Arch either. Arch is a bit advanced and not too easy to new users, so that won't do for some people...

... just install Linux Mint instead.

Critique *

I think you can use both: https://comparewords.com/critic/critique

The word critic is a noun, the word critique is the verb.

You would have critiques of Debian, not critic.

ok

I use Arch with KDE and a bunch of always open applications. At rest it uses 8GB. I paid for the whole 64GB kit, and I'm going to use the whole 64GB.

Damn you edited the original comment and now my reply is out of context. RIP

Arch, btw

The typical path: Mint -> Arch -> Fedora.

Why go past Arch? What's the use case/flavor?

You literally just used "critique" as a noun.

As someone who uses arch, its just stability. Arch is great for a hobby, if you want to do work, use fedora. Its so much simpler. That being said, I love arch because of the tinkering, and that lack of tinkering is why I switched off fedora.

Ah, got it. Thanks. :)

People losing their voice from telling everyone they use Arch?

Gotteeem!

3 years later and I'm still on Mint.

I’ve got NixOS with KDE and I run several containerized services through podman. System idles at 5.8gb.

I know this is just a meme but has Ubuntu fallen that bad?

Ubuntu did welcomed me to the Linux fam 16 years ago or so, so I am grateful but I have not used it for at least 12 years by now

Arch is love. Arch is life.

A critic critiques and can have a critique. A critic can't critics nor can have a critic. A critic can criticize and can have a criticism.

Critical thinking suggests that it is critical that everyone understands this.

Ergo the statement "critique is a verb" isn't the whole truth.

Fresh breath -> curved spine -> m'lady

I installed 26.04 the other day and it seems like a pretty decent release, I may keep it around for a bit.

Same. No reason to switch as I have no desire to tinker

Yeah that's me, but I started on Ubuntu. Arch is awesome, but Fedora does most of the same things and it's so much easier to maintain an installation of

Tiny core Linux: i can run on 64 MB of ram. (with GUI)

I was going to stack 4 to 6 Arch VMs inside each other.

Now I'm wondering if I can go further...

I use QubesOS with Debian templates so ram is something in high demand. Luckily I have plenty of it to spare. I made minimal arch templates to try optimise but it really didn't help once all the required bs was installed.

My statement was within the context of the thread text. Apologies for the confusion.

I got got.

I "do work" just fine on Arch but maybe I've just gotten used to the quirks and the DIY aspect of it. None of it is an obstacle to productivity anymore.

I do realize I'm not the average person and am some kind of freak that likes to take working stuff apart and put it back together for funsies.

Mint user: I don't care how much RAM my system uses as long as it works.

Some people just need an OS that works and don't have time to waste on tinkering and fixing it every so often

The "free (physical) RAM is wasted RAM" adage rules.

Arch is nice, I noticed slightly higher fps in a few games after switching.
Not sure how much overhead there is on it, but I use AwesomeWM which I launch from the commandline since I don't have it run at startup, and I must say I do like the interface for launching programs, I can either do the commandline name or the name of the program will often be fuzzy find away in the launch bar...

If only windows had some kind of menu where you could find programs to launch (and not search the web), and not cram adds down your throat.

Tell me how deep the rabbit hole can go.

Ibwish more linux people had this mentality of "if its not broke don't fix it". After years of floating around different distros, I just want something that works, is stable, and the OOTB is easy and works. So I've just gone back to mint debian edition. Idc, I don't have time to be tinkering with my computer

I dunno. There are some of us who run Mint not because we don't know what we're doing but because we do* and we don't want to have to deal with any more nonsense than we absolutely have to.

From that small cohort, there are those of us who'll frown when all we have open is a few browser tabs and the system's using 8GB of RAM, twice the "recommended" spec. On startup with nothing running it's over 1GB.

It's hard not to see it as wasteful when you're old enough to remember perfectly good machines running on single-digit megabytes. **

* Or at least, think we do.

** Yes, things are much more complex these days. But are they really a thousand times more complex?

A safe bet is the best bet.

Arch is like your psychotic ex. Sex is great, but one day, you wake up because she's burning the sheets of your bed while you're still inside.

I'm always surprised by that kind of statements. I had more to tinker with Fedora than Arch, by a huge margin.

I'll try. But if I forget, I'll probably post about it on my Mastodon and an appropriate community here (got any recommendations?)

Been using it at work for LAMP stack dev for like 3 years and it never gave me issues.

The only trouble I have with it, is that my company bought an arrow lake lenovo thinkbook and all the firmware is proprietary or too new... My camera doesn't work well, I get crashrs, graphics glitches... But that is on Lenovo and my company not on Ubuntu afaik.

Good to know, thanks for taking the time to reply

I've had Arch on a laptop for like 4 years now, its also my main gaming rig. The only issue I ever had was my own fault, I didnt put enough memory on the system partition (and just partitioning a terminal use-case device at all). I'm really interested in what's happened to others cause I have yet to experience it lol

Does it get security updates?

probably

That's what I'm trying to say though, I'm at the point to where it's not a waste of time for me because I know immediately what to do if something goes wrong or I need to make some sort of config change or install/remove software. I'm no longer "tinkering" with it, I'm using it. It's just as fast for me as it is for someone on a more "user friendly" OS.

In other words, I have scaled most of the learning curve cliff.

They've done the menu dirty. Used to just list apps. Now it shows you everything but the apps.

Ubuntu bad am I rite guys!