In the Ubuntu community, users approach the system primarily through the GUI. The documentation is mostly GUI-centric. It is like Windows on Linux.
That’s okay. It’s a popular approach, but I prefer to think of the GUI as an application running on the system rather than as the system itself. Just a silly thing I have.
Is Manjaro primarily a GUI distro in that the goal is for users to do absolutely everything through the GUI?
Yes Manjaro uses and has a GUI. 
I’m running Manjaro 20 Gnome and the gui works well and I’m happy with it.
I’ve been running it for 3 weeks now and it runs great!
It depends on how you use it. Regarding the documentation, I felt that it is not GUI centric, it explains both the approaches sufficiently well.
Well the GUI sometimes known as Windows, Icons, Mouse, and Pointers, or WIMP has been around since the very late 70’s. It started out in Computer Research performed by Xerox.
Now you can use Most Linux Distros completely through a GUI without touching the CLI or calling a Terminal very often.
Howdy!
Manjaro has a dozen of preconfigured Desktop Environment, or GUI, that you can choose from upon your liking!
By using Manjaro Architect, you can choose more precisely the option that would fulfill your desires, can ever decide to not install a GUI if that is your wish!
Therefore, most documentation is pointed towards the use of the terminal for faster configuration.
Have a wonderful day!
Have you looked at our wiki?
… despite how you decide to frame it, all linux is a “GUI on top of a system” … that system is linux or the distro which is comprised of things like repos, kernel tweaks, packages and libraries (rarely is the bulk of that ‘gui’).
That said, manjaro does have the philosophy of being approachable for beginners.
And of course attention is given to the GUI.
Users can spend as much they want in TTY, nobody is stopping them to use only terminal. Manjaro provides a user manual as PDF, so indeed to view that you require a PDF reader that usually has a GUI. Manjaro documentation can be read online, trough wiki too, and a terminal browser can be used too for that.
To be honest, i fail to catch the purpose of this topic.
It’s a question about the goal of the Manjaro distribution. It is not intended as a criticism. I am seeking information that is all.
Thank you for your straightforward and refreshingly non-defensive reply.
The goal for Manjaro is to be accessible to everyone.
This means that there is GUI for tasks which Arch users handle in terminal.
If you take a look at the guides in the #contributions:Tutorials section - and the wiki (undergoing revision at the moment) you will see that most - if not all has been explained using terminal.
So I would say Manjaro is very much terminal centric - but uses GUI as well.
Like most (not all) Linux distros, Manjaro can be used through a GUI or with a CLI. Use whichever you prefer, or as I and many others do, use both! If a distro is GUI-centric or terminal-centric but still has both then it really doesn’t matter very much what it’s goals are, you still have a choice. 
You are the most welcome! 
To me the primary goal of manjaro is choice. You can make it exactly how you want it and create your own personal linux experience that’s unique to you.
You can use it entirely as cli or pretty much entirely gui. You can run any desktop or windows manager you want. You can have as minimalistic or bloated system as you want. You can run snap,flatpak, aur, app image or official or any combination you want. You can run stable, testing or unstable branches depending on what type of experience you want.
Manjaro tries to cater for everyone from beginners to advanced arch users and does a pretty good job of it. I think Phil and the team are going to carry on along this path
I’m thinking of MS Windows. You have the choice of using the terminal but very often when using the terminal to perform, say, configuration tasks, you are presented with a dialog.
I know that many users prefer the GUI. They are not necessarily naive or inexperienced, they are sophisticated users many with technical skill far beyond mine. I mean no disrespect for that preference, but I would be very disappointed if Manjaro was thinking of that direction.
Please understand that I am new here.
I saw a post about the intention to replace pacman with pamac. I believe pamac is a GUI application with a CLI interface tacked on as an afterthought. Network Manager, for example, is like this.
That’s okay. I’m not one to get in the way of others’ preferences. However I feel in some cases, such as in the Windows example, others preferences get in the way of mine.
Hi! I understand that you are new and it does take some time to become accustomed to Linux if you are coming from Windows.
Regarding that post you saw: It is not possible to replace Pacman with Pamac. The reason for this is that Pacman is the package manager for Arch Linux, and therefore Manjaro too. Pamac is just a GUI interface for interacting with Pacman. Every GUI is just an interface to interact with a program which can also be done via commands in a terminal eg CLI. Unless a GUI is made very feature rich (perhaps over complicated) there are far more things you can do using the Command Line.
To sum up: every time you click on a command in Pamac you are issuing a command to Pacman. Take Pacman away, and Pamac would not do anything!
As a suggestion I think reading up a bit about the way Linux works, and more specifically how an Arch-base system works would help you a lot on your Linux journey. The Arch Wiki is a great place to read and learn, and there are loads of things elsewhere online regarding Linux in general. Have fun 
Thank you for this reassurance.
Now: I have been a Linux user since the late-1990s. That may be just a bit longer than many here have been alive. Through that time I’ve used Windows only at work and at home to run VirtualBox until I’m free of the machine’s warranty requirements.
That doesn’t make me an expert. There are people using Linux for just a couple years who are more knowledgeable. However I have developed a fondness for the text terminal and its powers. Text scripting is also for me crucial. I would hate to have that power replaced by GUI macros.
This last is not likely at all, I know, but I’m sure there are some for whom that is a pretty dream.
And I am not resistant to change. I embraced systemd for example. So…
It seems to me a lot of people who wish for a GUI-only operating system misunderstand computing, which unfortunately seems to be a huge amount of everyday folk who use computers. They see a GUI and they click on a button and Oh! Google appears. Then they click on another button and Oh! Facebook appears. Then they look at babies and cats. I am not sure there is much hope for them 
Umm, not really.
do a search on alpm
What has Pamac got to do with power management?
You said if pacman is removed, pamac won’t work. I’m not sure about that because as I understand it, pamac accesses alpm directly, not through pacman.
Just pointing that out.