That’s the best you can do:
Observation:- They rarely bother reading any tutorials, or related posts, even when directed to them; the trend is they ask a vague question; wait 2 minutes for an answer; and then leave.
Or, am I being too harsh? 
Tell me, do you have AUR packages installed?
AUR is not officially supported because this is for users to maintain and take responsibility and Manjaro has no way to support them. Even Arch is not keen on taking any responsibility for them.
Also, since Manjaro is targeted for less technically inclined users, encouraging AUR may be risky, so the strategy of heavy discouraging AUR makes sense. Still, this is, using your language, bollocks.
I’m sure, that most of the users that chose Manjaro, did it because it has access to AUR. Without it, Manjaro would be a flop. It doesn’t matter if you use AUR or not, the mere possibility that you can install AUR packages on Manjaro is just one of the biggest perks that played a major role in choosing Manjaro.
Just imagine a version of Ubuntu without the ability to install additional repos or deb packages, where you have a distro that has it. It doesn’t require a master degree to predict which one would succeed. That is why people are hating the direction Ubuntu is going, but that’s a more complicated topic.
Anyway, if Manjaro would somehow block AUR, so I couldn’t use it, I know I would leave Manjaro. It’s not that I don’t appreciate other perks of Manjaro, I do, but without AUR, it’s like without someone without a leg and there are other options that would have more perks.
Pretending that AUR is not important to Manjaro is just self deluding.
Yes, as I already mentioned; but very few.
You have that back asswards; another term you might like to diminish.
I disagreed with your statement “if Manjaro would have no AUR, we wouldn’t be using it”, which isn’t true; rather it’s – because it’s there – that we might use it. Although, to a new user the AUR is typically irrelevant, until they eventually learn of it’s existence.
I’m not sure of that at all. Maybe for you that’s true, and for some others; but certainly not most. In any case, that’s the same point rehashed.
Well, Ubuntu is another story, in itself.
You’re not a new user, clearly, so your point is out of context.
The possibility of blacklisting the AUR was in relation to a possible static Manjaro release, which was earlier mentioned; and is not relevant to other Manjaro releases. I wouldn’t use such a release but, no doubt, there are many who might prefer it. At this stage, is seems more a thought experiment, than much else.
Thank you for your comments.
The more popular question from newer users would probably be “Does it have Flatpak?”; which itself indicates an apparent ignorance of the native Linux software ecosystem.
It is important, but not THAT important. It is not a show stopper. Exactly like snap and flatpack support. If it was THAT important, arch based distros would have been the big dog in the neighborhood, but guess what - ubuntu has probably 10 times more userbase withouth AUR.
No, they wait longer than two minutes. About twenty minutes. And then they start a duplicate thread. 
Please don’t buy into the marketing slogans on Manjaro’s main website. As the matter of fact, I have a Feedback draft for a complaint about that, but I haven’t gotten around to posting it yet. And part of this protest — which several of the team members support — is why I wrote this… 
Manjaro is a community-driven distribution with a commercial arm, and like all commercial businesses, this commercial arm seeks to attract as many users as possible, which is why Manjaro is being profiled on its main website as suitable for absolute newcomers to GNU/Linux and for hardcore gamers, while Manjaro is definitely not suitable for that type of users.
I for one did not, because I didn’t even know what the AUR was until after I had already installed Manjaro and signed up at (the previous iteration of) the forum.
I did however have certain for myself required packages in mind before I installed Manjaro, and most of them were in the repository. One was not, but I built that one from sources, and in the meantime it has also already long been added to the repo.
This is not to say that I don’t have any AUR packages installed. On the contrary, I have quite a few. But they were not a requirement when I installed Manjaro.
Ubuntu does have something similar. I’ve never used Ubuntu, but I’ve been a resident of alt.os.linux.ubuntu on Usenet for over a decade — among many other GNU/Linux and generic UNIX discussion groups — and so I know of its existence. It’s called “the PPAs”, and they are third-party repositories. And there are many of them. 
2 Likes
It’s the commercial arm that need the proposed “simplified” version of Manjaro, to avoid complaints from, or make things more palatable for, those users of the devices that come with preinstalled Manjaro. I can’t say I’m surprised at this. I posted this in July 2021:
Also, doesn’t Manjaro sell preinstalled machines? They can’t have them breaking if they can help it. (I do have some reservations about selling computers to the general public with a rolling distro that actually still requires some maintenance and attention to release announcements, but never mind…)
1 Like
Too uncontrollable; too risky; some of the very reasons for this little black duck avoiding that cesspool. Too often, the cause of any given failure was attributed to poorly-conceived scripts originating from a PPA.
“I can write a script. I’m a d-e-v-e-l-o-p-e-r now. I’m so freaking awesome.” Cynical? Maybe, but then again, my sojourn with 'buntu didn’t last long enough to find anything overly positive.
1 Like
Ppa is no more or less risky than aur, or downloaded exe. It is also not official as part of the os on install. You trust the developer of the program.
I also kept them to a minimum, like only for libreoffice to have the newest version (one of the reasons i chose rolling release now).
Containerized manjaro derivative is a nice idea, just call it otherwise and don’t stop developing this one. It should be different project, not a replacement.
And as we previously discussed, the marketing on the site have to be toned down. It is not hard to use distro like arch or gentoo, but it is not for beginners. It’s in the middle.
1 Like
Although I agree with the philosopy, I still find the AUR [generally] more reliable than PPA’s in comparison; developer trust notwithstanding. Moderation is a key factor in offsetting any associated risk; and so is software curation; a concept I’m not overly fond of; yet it’s still effective.
I don’t think that’s been suggested otherwise. Although, I suppose the assumption might be easily made if someone isn’t following the thread in context (that happens a lot).
Manjaro is a convenient way to install Arch for those who cannot afford the time to learn its nuances (and, regrettably, also for those who simply won’t spend the time). Its unfortunate in some ways that Manjaro’s apparent user-friendly appeal reaches quite as far as it does; after all, it’s still Arch under the hood, and Arch is anything but beginner-friendly.
1 Like
No its not. Manjaro is not Arch.
2 Likes
Obviously, but the point remains; italicized for context.
1 Like
I know, my comment was only meant for discussing that hypothetical Manjaro version.
I’m sure, I wouldn’t install it and there would be no point of installing it on any “grandpa computers”, just because there would be no drivers that are accessible only via AUR. Not only git packages, but also printer drivers are available in AUR, which makes it a necessity. Flatpacks and snaps simply are not enough.
Many obscure drivers are available only via deb, rpm or by compilation. Using AUR is incredibly convenient. Trying to adjust the mentioned formats to Manjaro is beyond the average user’s knowledge.
I admit, that I started on Manjaro long before flatpacks, snaps or appimages were created and at that time, having Arch distro without AUR would be stupid. Now the situation has changed but still, AUR is an extremely important feature, whether you use it or not, because there is a high chance you may want something from there at some point.
The whole thing behind Manjaro is that it is Arch based, has access to AUR and is easy to install and more stable. Take away AUR and you will get a castrated version that is less usable.
This is just like in life, extreme safety comes with A LOT OF LIMITATIONS, so safety is opposite to freedom. Manjaro is more stable than Arch, but creating even more stable Manjaro would mean less freedom. I don’t think that such version of Manjaro would be popular. I wouldn’t find any use case for it. Again, I know we are talking about a Manjaro spin, not about Manjaro itself.
1 Like
Maybe in some parallel universe. 
1 Like
You’ve found the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen bridge? Please share the equations.
For me, it is. I am having the same OS install over 8 years. Sure, sometimes I had to fix it from time to time (there was no braking updates since few years), but it wasn’t anything serious enough to do reinstall.
Do you also have an Arch system for 8 years which is “less stable” (need to put this phrase in quotes because it’s so stupid it hurts my brain whenever I see it)? If not, how can you make that comparison? You might as well say that Manjaro is more stable than Linux Mint.
Google Schwarzschild wormhole, you can get them there.
I simply prefer the relative convenience of Manjaro, as opposed to Arch. I did have a more-or-less stable Arch installation at one time, but it was an incredible time sink for me; finding and refreshing my mind with often out-dated documentation, whenever needed.
This probably means I’m not a purist; so be it. There are many things I’m not, but I still appreciate all the work that goes into making Manjaro as me-friendly as it does. It saves time; plus, it looks better than most DE default offerings available using an Arch-from-scratch methodology.
I likes my Preciouss, Manjaro.
Linux Mint is exceptionally stable; I use a copy as a drink coaster…
No major spills yet!
2 Likes
I did use the unstable Manjaro branch and there was a HUGE difference between it and the testing branch. Unstable branch was breaking very frequently, courtesy of broken Arch packages. Granted, those packages were fixed within hours, but still, the chance of installing a broken package was so high, that I made the decision to go back to testing branch, and use unstable on rare occasions, where I want something sooner (like the newest Plasma release).
This experience alone showed my how big of a difference in stability is thank to Manjaro testing and stable repos.
Of course, I maid just have a bad luck where I jumped into the unstable branch where some unusual amount of faulty Arch packages showed up (it lasted a few months to give you a context), and maybe that doesn’t happen so often nowadays, but still, it gave me some taste of Arch issues and some were so severe that broke the GRUB itself. Luckily, I always have backups.
I’m sure I don’t have as many app’s as a lot on here do but I’ve had very few issue’s on the unstable branch.Pretty much any issue has been with a conflicting file in updates.I have time shift installed but I’ve only had to use it once when I got carried away and removed all the orphan files without paying attention which I need to do again as I have quite a few.The manjaro-pacnew-checker along with time shift and paying attention here on the forum has made Manjaro work very well for the last few years on the unstable branch.
1 Like
Lol, dude…
If it was breaking it was breaking because of Manjaro’s incompatible packages. That HUGE difference you were seeing between testing and unstable branches is Manjaro actually fixing/compiling their own packages to be compatible with the rest.
So again, if you think that unstable Manjaro branch is same as Arch stable, then you couldn’t be more wrong.
Damn, this is just laughable. Do you really think Manjaro somehow tests Arch packages and then fixes and repackage them? Sure, again, in that parallel universe.
All that Manjaro can do with all the Arch packages is to wait arbitrarily long before pushing them to stable, so that whatever bug can be fixed upstream. And I mean upstream from Arch.
It didn’t. It gave you taste of Manjaro unstable. Funnily enough, grub is one of the packages compiled by Manjaro, so of course it broke, because it needed to be recompiled.
I could go on with plenty of other issues that people were having only on Manjaro. You can check yourself on archlinux.org how many interventions were necessary there lately and then compare them with what was here.
Two off the top of my head: removing gnome portal on non-gnome DEs and overwriting glibc-locales (or whatever the package name is). These two alone probably make up for 50 topics here.
(I guess the portal thing was present on Arch too, but the amount of people having problems on Manjaro makes me think that package was included by default in non-gnome isos.)