hi Often experimented as a challenge, the install of Archlinux becomes more simple and nice with Fu-rch http://www.jeffstory.org/wordpress/?p=1345 http://sourceforge.net/projects/furcharchlinuxguiinstaller/ The old school, for the command line and keyboard fans http://www.muktware.com/2013/11/how-to-install-arch-linux-updated/16825 Rgds
I agree. Why mess around with convoluted third-party installers/guides? Just go straight to the source, the Arch Linux Beginners' Guide.
Sorry, this is not my opinion.. The dev explains his main motivation here http://www.jeffstory.org/wordpress/?p=1220 Distro like Arch, or even Gentoo, should not be the paradise of skilled elite. Most distros can nowadays be installed with a graphical installer, and this is also the case of some Arch based ones like Manjaro or Antergos. Then Fu-rch is more helpful for a beuinner than the Arch guide. It appears difficult for someone who has never experimented an Arch install to really circumscribe the install challenge for a neo-ex Windows-linux user. A few years ago, i needed two try for installing it, and this graphical installer will save me time to istall it on other computers. And most of all, the succes of Windows has demonstrated that things made easy have the best chance of success. And with elitist attitudes and opinions, Linux in general and Arch in particular will always stay on the same side...a niche OS market...that try to survive...
It's not hard to install Arch. The 1st time, maybe. But then you can install as fast as Mint, for example.
Installing Arch isn't hard, I agree. I think it even got a bit easier. But maintaining the system requires plenty of time. When Arch works, it works beautifully, everything is bleeding edge, crashes are seldom and how things were designed just made sense. The KISS principle was what made me move away from Arch because the constant shifts & changes in order to make it "even more KISS" broke my system way too often. Like the decision to merge binaries' folders into one /usr/bin to adhere to the KISS principle. I miss the way Arch was couple of years ago.
My experience with Arch Linux to date has been stellar. I switched over from Windows about 4 months ago. This is my first Linux system. I wasn't using Arch during the binary folder merge you mentioned or during the move to systemd. So maybe I just haven't been with Arch long enough to encounter any serious aggravations. Or maybe when things break, I see it as a motivator to learn something new. Perhaps not always a welcome one, but a motivator nonetheless.
We are in 2014, and it's time for the Arch community to catch the head wagon...and to become as wildely used as Ubuntu and its serial Kubuntu, Justinbierberbuntu or bouloubouloubuntu... More seriously, for a fresh user of Ubuntu, Arch classic first install is quite hard. Archboot and the Arch Ultimate install scripts are already alternative to Fu-rch. After some experience with other distros, i always come back to home...Arch.
I agree with you. In my opinion, this elitist snobbery so persistent within the Arch/Gentoo/etc community needs to fall by the wayside. It was present when I first started using Linux back in 2005 and it's still alive and kicking today. This "we're better than you because we like to keep things difficult" attitude is ridiculous. It's time for them to embrace change and stop being a relic of the past. Later...
Umm, are you drunk or something? Maintaining Arch is the easiest thing in the Linux world. Installing it is the tricky part for beginners (for the 1st or 2nd time), but not maintaining. I spent more time maintaining Ubuntu in a month than maintaining Arch in almost a year. Arch gives far less problems than Ubuntu or openSUSE (just giving an example). All you gotta do is look up the news, keep up to date with the dev-mailing list and RSS Feed, and you're fine. On the binary move: They said they were gonna do it months before the event, and clear instructions were given so that nobody would have problems. I suppose you either didn't know about the event or didn't carefully read the instructions Arch has a specific target audience, which isn't beginners. For those there are Ubuntu/Mint/etc. If a person wants to try Arch, the Beginners' Guide is a good place to start I know the people in the Arch forums can be harsh. I don't approve most of their attitude twards beginners, but if that's how they act the least we can do is to show them that their attitude can push newcomers away from Arch. And it not only happens in Arch's forums, in askubuntu.com they too treat beginners as a "lower class of people", they negative questions and close questions that THEY know are already answered, but beginners don't. On the other side, Ubuntuforums is a more subtle place, although asking for help there is 8/10 that you: 1) Won't get an answer, EVER; 2) A newbie will answer and won't help you. The best forums is openSUSE's one. There are tons of people willing to help, most of them are experienced users (hell, there are even forensic experts who administrate the forum, and they ANSWER there too).
Your position is quite a paradox. You want Arch to change and yet it is what you always come back to. You must like it the way it is or you would stick to Ubuntu or one of its derivatives. I see this opinion regarding the Arch Linux forums all the time, but I have yet to see the evidence to support it. What I do see evidence of is a low tolerance for help vampires. This is a stand to be admired and more help forums should follow Arch's lead. As an example, I was treated very well when I submitted my first bug report. Had I not taken the time to read the provided instructions beforehand and been scolded for doing something wrong, I would have expected and deserved it.
What you consider evidence might not be applicable to everybody. You seem like a well established Arch user, so maybe the way people deal with newbies in the forums seems like a no big deal to you Mostly it's not the words that "hurt", but the way they're put together. I remember having problems with Steam fonts one day. I googled my problem and got to Arch forums, where a user had the same problem. The others users pointed to a Steam page where it had the fonts to download and instructions to extract them, but the OP didn't know how to proceed. He was told something like: That's what I'm talking about. The way newcomers are treated can be rude at most times in Arch's forums. I know because I was there one day, not in Arch's forums, but in other forums where I got the same treatment. So, he was new to Linux and yet he managed to install Arch. He must have some sort of notion to where to go, but yet he didn't know how to proceed. What's the big deal? It's not hard to answer accordingly In fact, here's the thread. https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=170310
Installing and setting up arch Linux is not that hard. the guides on the archlinux website are really good. I would of kept arch linux on a dual boot except for the fact that it wasn't the most stable. I like the idea of rolling release distros but the stability needs to be there for it to be worth while. The good thing about arch linux is that you only install what you want/need and can easily disable stuff via a text file. I think some people get put off simply because the installer doesn't have a GUI.
Why not? If Linux beginners have their space, why can't advanced users too? If a Linux user don't want to go through the install process, he/she can freely use another distro. Nobody's forced to use Arch. There are thousands of distros that fit everybody's needs, from beginners to intermediate to advanced. There's no point in transforming the entire Linux family into one big easy one. And that's why new Linux users should use them. Or users who don't want/can't learn the install process. That's because Arch's Beginners' Guide is not for Linux Beginners or people who have never used Linux. I know! Arch seems like a monster with 7 heads. But it's not. It's rather simple to install it once you ready the wiki and try a few times on VirtualBox. Even Youtube videos are welcome, as long as they teach the user what each command does, instead of pointing a blind person through a mine field. That depends. I install Arch faster then the Ubuntu automated installer can Install Ubuntu. That's was true in the 80's/90's where most people started using Windows and it became widespread. It was rather simple to use and it began to propagate. Nowadays Linux Mint or Ubuntu are far more easy to install and maintain than a Windows install. Windows success IMO is mostly due to what I said above, DRM's, monopoly and other strategies. But it's not as good as Linux, not even close. Linux doesn't try to survive, it smashes Windows outside the Desktop market. On the Desktop market, there aren't only Arch and Gentoo. Ubuntu, Mint and Debian are probably the most known distros and where people Start. In fact, it's a paradise compared to Windows. That's what I felt in 2006 where I first used Linux.
Not sure when you started using Arch but user intervention sometimes led to unrepairable errors that rendered an unbootable system. Also often the problems were not isolated. As I recall there were plenty of users that had similar issues like those I had. There were, however, unofficial solutions posted in the forums that demanded much elbow grease and time that I couldn't afford to invest in so I decided it was time to move on. Like I said, when Arch works it works beautifully. A simple Pacman -Syu and your system gets the newest packages, dependencies and often there is no need for user intervention. A side note: I agree Arch isn't for beginners and the devs claim Arch wasn't even made for the masses. A common line you can read on the forum is "Arch isn't Ubuntu" whenever a newbie wants a solution to his problem. But one has to wonder why there's a lengthy Beginner's guide to begin with, not to mention a sub-forum where beginners can ask away their newbie questions if Arch was never meant to be used by non-skilled users? You can't have it both ways. Repeating myself - I miss Arch the way it was couple of years ago.
Sabayon Linux rolls nicely (based on Gentoo) and user intervention is almost never needed. There is also much less bloat than other ready-to-go distros.
Because the "beginners guide" does not mean "Linux beginner" or "never used Linux guide", but to an Arch beginner. That's a totally different user.
I don't see your point though. You realize Archlinux was made by the devs for the devs only? To me it's pretty clear skilled Archer's don't want people from the Ubuntu-camp migrating to Arch (I've seen this category of comments on the forum, Archers more or less telling people to go back to Ubuntu - this advise isn't faulty per se, but the condescending way it's being delivered indicates many Archers want the system available for a selected few) and if the newbie installer FAQ is not intended for those who have "never-used-linux before", then to whom is it for? Obviously, it's for anybody who has some experience from GUI based distros, no? Therein lies the paradox ; Skilled Archer's don't want Ubuntu ppl (e.g. users who have only experience with GUI based systems) to use Arch but at the same time, the Beginner's Guide exists.
That's my point. I'm not a well established Arch user. I've only been running Arch for about 4 months. My real Linux experience before that was zero. I have played with some of the distros in Virtualbox over the years, but nothing beyond a few hours time in total and certainly nothing that could have prepared me for installing Arch. However, I know how to read and I am willing to do it when needed. The user in the thread you cited should have read the link posted by jasonwryan. It stated exactly how to solve the problem. If the user then didn't know how to copy files in linux, go learn how. Read a book, use a search engine - there's a ton of resources out there. His reply of "I don't know where to find the fonts folder or if it even exists" shows that he didn't even read the information at the provided link because it clearly states the paths to 2 font folders he/she could have used. What I see in this example and many others that could be referenced as being harsh is an implicit statement by posters that "my time is much more valuable than yours". Spend your time to reply to my every question so that I don't have to take my valuable time to learn on my own. My experience tells me that the Arch community welcomes new users. What I see tells me that they will not tolerate laziness and helplessness. And I don't blame them. I wouldn't either.
Really? I don't see this mentioned anywhere on the about page. I see "users" mentioned a lot in the text, but not "devs". The Beginner's Guide is for users like me. New to Arch Linux. Able to learn Linux using the vast amount of resources already available. Not burdening the Arch forums seeking general Linux help.
I agree with all the positive comments regarding Arch; I learnt the most about Linux (or how an operating system actually works) when running Arch for a few years and if you are willing to search out the information you will seldom go too far wrong. The arch wiki is still a great place for info even for those not running Arch. Well worth testing if you have time and a little common sense (and the odd backup..).
You assume people who don't want to waste time doing futile things are lazy and helpless. That's mistake no. 1. Mrk
Please elaborate. Your reply doesn't have any context to the point I was making. I never said that "people who don't want to waste time doing futile things are lazy and helpless". I completely agree with your statement. If you're someone that wants to be lazy, that's fine. Just not on someone else's precious time. Also, what are the "futile things" you're referring to? If it is learning how to use Linux, why post questions at all? It's futile, so move on to something that will be within reach and stop wasting everyone's time. EDIT: typo correction
You said: Looks like you think that the "Beginners guide" is for actual beginners. It's not. It's supposed to serve beginners to Arch, not to beginners on Linux. For those, there are easier distros. I don't see it written anywhere. Got any source? Not at all. There's no paradox. What happens in the forums is there are a lot of Help Vampires who don't want to do their homework and want full support from people who are not there paid to assist them. Don't know what sudo is? Google it, for cheesus sakes. If the user demonstrates he tried everything he could and show a good thread with good info, most users would love to help. Another thing that happens is that the user doesn't understand how to install the system. If he/she is a Linux beginner, the user is advised to NOT try Arch, as it requires a more advanced level of knowledge to install. There's no point in teaching Physics to a 1st grade student, they need to go to the basics first. The same applies to Arch. My grandma has some experience with GUI distros and yet she doesn't know what "cp" does. Can she install Arch? Or a more comprehensible way to put it: Would a "F1 Beginners' Guide" serve those who have never drived before? Obviously you have no idea what "beginners" mean to the Arch Wiki and there's no point in me trying to explain it to you, and so I won't do it anymore. Well than that's amazing! Although I'm pretty sure the Linux experience you had before trying Arch was more than enough. And that's a good thing. If you rely on others to do everything for you, then there's something wrong. Well, sometimes that's what happens when some users come to Arch: Their minds are not "trained" to do research, they don't know what a dot in front of a folder means, etc. But even in these cases, I don't think that replying rudely is necessary. Bravo. I tend to help at first and I tell them do do research. But if I noticed the user is not willing to type a few keys on the keyboard, then I couldn't care less about his/her Arch experience. Clap clap I don't think he assumed that, but I agree with your point. I myself didn't have the time to learn about Arch till last year. Was a lazy? No. But there are cases where laziness comes, and it's easy to identify them. Your own experiences don't reflect the reality of most people.
