Why don’t people just use Arch directly instead of using derivatives? Well… I can understand using something like CachyOS as it has a different kernel with optimisations but Manjaro feels very irrelevant. If you just want Arch Linux with simple installation, just use the archinstall script. Regardless of which derivative you use, Arch based distros are going to be heavy maintenance than something like Bazzite, Mint or Ubuntu.
I used Manjaro for a few years before switching to Arch. Manjaro finds a nice sweespot for “Arch but also nice”. Furthermore, Arch has gotten much more user friendly in the last 5 years or so. Back in late 2010s, Manjaro was adding a lot of value on top of Arch.
What really bothered me about Manjaro was the “forum cops” they employ, who are super aggressive to newcomers and unhelpful. It was not a nice experience to seek help. Say what you will about Arch people, they are at least helpful.
I finally switched to Arch when I got my new machine. I recommend the same.
Just to add to the 2010s bit, I tried Arch in like… 2015 I think it would’ve been. I followed the wiki to the letter. It was not my first Linux install, I’d been experimenting with a lot of distros for five years by then. I could not get it to work. To be fair, I still haven’t tried Arch in 2026, I use CachyOS, but I think back then Manjaro was really the only thing providing that type of experience. Everyone holds the Arch wiki on a pedestal because it’s so useful, but the install guide and state of Arch back in 2015 simply wasn’t what it is today. I haven’t ever used Manjaro so I can’t really speak for it, but that’s just sort of my guess as someone who had difficulty with Arch from that era. Luckily we have CachyOS, EndeavorOS, and, presumably, a better install process on vanilla Arch now.
I had Debian and was not satisfied with the fact that I had to wait ages for updates of stuff like KDE Plasma. I wanted something with shorter update intervals.
I decided against Ubuntu because of the company behind it.
I decided against Mint, because it’s on level 3 in the derivate tree, so more places where something can go wrong.
Then I found Manjaro and liked it from the beginning. Very easy to install (no script necessary), awesome custom Plasma theme, short update intervals, …
Arch can be scary. I wanted a reliable, easy OS for private use and I knew, I get that with Manjaro. With Arch, I was not sure whether I might FCK something up.
from what ive heard of manjaro, they do less testing on new packages than arch. also, nothing on arch ever broke my pc except for the clock, which was probably because i configured it wrong (didn’t use archinstall).
only time an update has ever done anything bad was like a week ago when plasma 6.6 launched and the login freezed the pc, but that was on cachyos, not main arch.
Arch derivatives that don’t do anything to the core packages or the root system seem very pointless to me. Because you can setup Vanilla Arch to be exactly like that derivative if you wanted to since Arch being a DIY distro. Arch based derivatives create unnecessary fragmentation in already fragmented Linux world. Arch itself is targeted for intermediate to advanced users to build a system from base.
It makes sense to make derivatives from Debian or Fedora because they have a lot of stuff packed in them for them to be user friendly and work out-of-the-box experience — then derivatives can add from or reduce from to make a distro designed for a specific use which can take much longer time than if the user did it by themselves since those parent distros are usually targeted for non tech enthusiasts.
“Why do people buy a car if they can make one themselves” type of argument. I’m a little shocked someone can walk so close to the point and not get it. It’s practically stabbing them in their face.
More like the manufacturer has stated that this car is meant to be built by the user themselves so they can understand it and maintain it by themselves, but then the user outsources it to a car builder who thinks one specific way of doing things is better (nothing wrong with it) instead and they slap their own branding on it. Then if the car breaks down due to a part incompatibility, the user doesn’t know what shit to do.
Sure, but the user knowing how to fix something or not wasn’t the problem or related to anything you said. It’s that you said they seem pointless to you and went on to describe their exact point of existence.
To be very clear, I’m not trying to make an argument for or against Arch derivatives, I just thought it was funny that you said they’re pointless because you can customize them when people use them specifically because they don’t want to bother with doing those customizations themselves.
I would consider using Endeavor OS because I just want something that can do basic work once it’s installed (I use CachyOS which is also an Arch derivative, but it modifies core packages which is different from what you’re talking about). Manjaro has separate criticisms, I’m not saying it’s “good.” I’m just saying it shouldn’t be surprising that someone wants to use Arch and wants customization on a bleeding edge, rolling release, but wants a system that isn’t quite so minimal once they’re done installing.
(I should try to install Arch to a VM or something and use this archinstall script. Because if it works as well as everyone says then my opinion might be different.)
Yeah I did mention in my above comments that using derivatives that fundamentally how your computer works is fine (like CachyOS). I myself was considering to switch for the performance gains.
You can try archinstall. I think you will like it.
I mean I get it. I am not an Arch elitist or something. Manjaro is doing something nobel. But it just goes against Arch’s philosophy of building and maintaining your own system and being responsible for it. That’s why I don’t see the point of Manjaro other than beginners saying “I use Arch btw”.
i wouldn’t call myself a Linux newbie, and I use CachyOS out of necessity (I have an ASUS laptop), and I’m perfectly content to introduce myself as way too lazy to do it the “proper” Arch way. Maybe someday.
Yeah I did mention in my above comments that derivatives like CachyOS makes sense because they fundamentally change how your computer operates. I just don’t feel the same way with Manjaro that’s all.
Yeah, I’m not defending Manjaro, they are too sloppy for me to do that. Rather EndeavourOS and CachyOS and similar which either give you a working Arch install with minimal effort or add something that may be of value to Arch. That said, the Manjaro distro itself is pretty good, especially if you swap the unstable repos which mirror the Arch ones. Kind of defeats the point of Manjaro though.
Back in 2015 for gaming PC: Steam and Nvidia driver updates via package manager, Xfce (used it before on multiple laptops), promise to be more stable than vanilla arch.
Why don’t people just use Arch directly instead of using derivatives? Well… I can understand using something like CachyOS as it has a different kernel with optimisations but Manjaro feels very irrelevant. If you just want Arch Linux with simple installation, just use the
archinstallscript. Regardless of which derivative you use, Arch based distros are going to be heavy maintenance than something like Bazzite, Mint or Ubuntu.I used Manjaro for a few years before switching to Arch. Manjaro finds a nice sweespot for “Arch but also nice”. Furthermore, Arch has gotten much more user friendly in the last 5 years or so. Back in late 2010s, Manjaro was adding a lot of value on top of Arch.
What really bothered me about Manjaro was the “forum cops” they employ, who are super aggressive to newcomers and unhelpful. It was not a nice experience to seek help. Say what you will about Arch people, they are at least helpful.
I finally switched to Arch when I got my new machine. I recommend the same.
Just to add to the 2010s bit, I tried Arch in like… 2015 I think it would’ve been. I followed the wiki to the letter. It was not my first Linux install, I’d been experimenting with a lot of distros for five years by then. I could not get it to work. To be fair, I still haven’t tried Arch in 2026, I use CachyOS, but I think back then Manjaro was really the only thing providing that type of experience. Everyone holds the Arch wiki on a pedestal because it’s so useful, but the install guide and state of Arch back in 2015 simply wasn’t what it is today. I haven’t ever used Manjaro so I can’t really speak for it, but that’s just sort of my guess as someone who had difficulty with Arch from that era. Luckily we have CachyOS, EndeavorOS, and, presumably, a better install process on vanilla Arch now.
My thinking process years ago was:
I had Debian and was not satisfied with the fact that I had to wait ages for updates of stuff like KDE Plasma. I wanted something with shorter update intervals.
I decided against Ubuntu because of the company behind it.
I decided against Mint, because it’s on level 3 in the derivate tree, so more places where something can go wrong.
Then I found Manjaro and liked it from the beginning. Very easy to install (no script necessary), awesome custom Plasma theme, short update intervals, …
Arch can be scary. I wanted a reliable, easy OS for private use and I knew, I get that with Manjaro. With Arch, I was not sure whether I might FCK something up.
from what ive heard of manjaro, they do less testing on new packages than arch. also, nothing on arch ever broke my pc except for the clock, which was probably because i configured it wrong (didn’t use archinstall).
only time an update has ever done anything bad was like a week ago when plasma 6.6 launched and the login freezed the pc, but that was on cachyos, not main arch.
I think, I haven’t had any mentionable problem with Manjaro over multiple years.
Arch derivatives that don’t do anything to the core packages or the root system seem very pointless to me. Because you can setup Vanilla Arch to be exactly like that derivative if you wanted to since Arch being a DIY distro. Arch based derivatives create unnecessary fragmentation in already fragmented Linux world. Arch itself is targeted for intermediate to advanced users to build a system from base.
It makes sense to make derivatives from Debian or Fedora because they have a lot of stuff packed in them for them to be user friendly and work out-of-the-box experience — then derivatives can add from or reduce from to make a distro designed for a specific use which can take much longer time than if the user did it by themselves since those parent distros are usually targeted for non tech enthusiasts.
There’s the difference, you don’t have to set the derivative up.
“Why do people buy a car if they can make one themselves” type of argument. I’m a little shocked someone can walk so close to the point and not get it. It’s practically stabbing them in their face.
More like the manufacturer has stated that this car is meant to be built by the user themselves so they can understand it and maintain it by themselves, but then the user outsources it to a car builder who thinks one specific way of doing things is better (nothing wrong with it) instead and they slap their own branding on it. Then if the car breaks down due to a part incompatibility, the user doesn’t know what shit to do.
Sure, but the user knowing how to fix something or not wasn’t the problem or related to anything you said. It’s that you said they seem pointless to you and went on to describe their exact point of existence.
To be very clear, I’m not trying to make an argument for or against Arch derivatives, I just thought it was funny that you said they’re pointless because you can customize them when people use them specifically because they don’t want to bother with doing those customizations themselves.
I would consider using Endeavor OS because I just want something that can do basic work once it’s installed (I use CachyOS which is also an Arch derivative, but it modifies core packages which is different from what you’re talking about). Manjaro has separate criticisms, I’m not saying it’s “good.” I’m just saying it shouldn’t be surprising that someone wants to use Arch and wants customization on a bleeding edge, rolling release, but wants a system that isn’t quite so minimal once they’re done installing.
(I should try to install Arch to a VM or something and use this archinstall script. Because if it works as well as everyone says then my opinion might be different.)
Yeah I did mention in my above comments that using derivatives that fundamentally how your computer works is fine (like CachyOS). I myself was considering to switch for the performance gains.
You can try archinstall. I think you will like it.
I mean I get it. I am not an Arch elitist or something. Manjaro is doing something nobel. But it just goes against Arch’s philosophy of building and maintaining your own system and being responsible for it. That’s why I don’t see the point of Manjaro other than beginners saying “I use Arch btw”.
i wouldn’t call myself a Linux newbie, and I use CachyOS out of necessity (I have an ASUS laptop), and I’m perfectly content to introduce myself as way too lazy to do it the “proper” Arch way. Maybe someday.
Yeah I did mention in my above comments that derivatives like CachyOS makes sense because they fundamentally change how your computer operates. I just don’t feel the same way with Manjaro that’s all.
Yeah, I’m not defending Manjaro, they are too sloppy for me to do that. Rather EndeavourOS and CachyOS and similar which either give you a working Arch install with minimal effort or add something that may be of value to Arch. That said, the Manjaro distro itself is pretty good, especially if you swap the unstable repos which mirror the Arch ones. Kind of defeats the point of Manjaro though.
Back in 2015 for gaming PC: Steam and Nvidia driver updates via package manager, Xfce (used it before on multiple laptops), promise to be more stable than vanilla arch.