Why Manjaro instead of Arch or Antergos

Hi there :slight_smile:
Okay, Manjaro updates at most…once per week, but, I use the stable bits of it :wink:
I dont use the unstable/testing as I need a stable system.
Updates, hate 'em or love 'em, are a fact of life. Cumbersome as they are, risky as they seem, they’re needed. Let’s take a piece of software, it’s good now. Tomorrow, it takes up some memory space and…poof…dead system. Would’nt you want that repaired? I would.
A roller has the advantage of always being up to date…if you update. However…if you skip an update (I do at times LOL) it’s no big deal. Realise that if you install Manjaro from a DVD, chances are that what you install has been updated…ages ago… :fearful: and…what do you do after install? Yep: update. So…while updates are a must…skipping an update will not kill ya, it may open a pothole in the road…no more…
Can I recommend? Manjaro. Trust me, and the thousands of others :smile_cat:
Love n kisses
Edit - Arch is more aggressive in the update corner too. Manjaro updates stable stuff. I had an Arch die on me due to an instability…so, in that aspect, Manjaro is safer, less agressive and maybe not that bleeding edge, but then, who really wants to bleed anyway?


The main difference between arch and manjaro stable is that with arch you should always read announcements before updating to know if manual intervention is needed. Manjaro updates automate many of the things that arch expects you to do yourself. It’s not that arch is unstable, it’s just gives you more responsibility of your system. If one reads announcements before updating and follows instructions thereof, there is no reason to expect major breakage from arch either. But if you just update blindly (like I do), you should stick to manjaro stable (unlike I do. I like unstable repos).


When you tinker enough with linux enough, you get comfortable with breakage.
“oh, mouse does not work? No big deal, just reboot with older kernel.”
“oh, windows entry disappeared from boot menu. I’ll just update grub then.”
"oops, accidentally reformatted my SD card with years worth of photos. I guess I run photorec then. "
“can’t boot/login anymore. Time to chroot from live USB then.”

I have broken my installation hundreds of times. It was almost always my own fault for trying something I did not understand. At first it was a bit scary, but at some point you get enough confidence in your ability to fix things that you don’t care.

Or you could just use something stable and not break things in the first place. That is probably a good idea if you are running a production system…



Edit - Arch is more aggressive in the update corner too. Manjaro updates stable stuff. I had an Arch die on me due to an instability…so, in that aspect, Manjaro is safer, less agressive and maybe not that bleeding edge, but then, who really wants to bleed anyway?

I’m not an advanced user but I love Bleeding Edge … Currently on Linux 4.9 Kernel plus I have and use a lot of AUR - packages. Spotify and Teamviewer are essential to me.

Manjaro has been the best thing to me since sliced bread. Manjaro Community and Forum “Rock”


similarly, Why LinuxMint instead of Ubumtu, same reasons for me, although maybe not the best example.

The Arch installation instructions reminded me of how I installed Linux 20 years ago. Been there, done that, don’t need to do it again.


Few years ago Linus Torvalds was (again) asked about his favorite distribution. He usually does not vote for any specific distro, for reasons we can all understand, but his response was “I like distributions with nice graphical installers”, or something like that.


I didn’t go for Arch as it looked too complicated, and some how I managed to never have heard of Antergos until after I switched to Manjaro (from Mint via LXLE).

I do like the rolling release model, it reminds me of OS X which is where I came from. Sure, updates weren’t as frequent, no worse than once a week usually. Problem was that they were muddier, often it would be ‘Security Update’, with a typical description of ‘necessary security updates and improvements’ or something to that effect. At least here I have a good idea of what’s being updated and at worst, a fair guess as to why.


Um … was that not supposed to be a joke ?

Super old comment about his preferences:


More recent Quora article that says he is using Fedora:


I am reminded of my motorcycle days…my pride and joy 1974 Norton 850 Commando, restored from a basket case by yours truly. Many would call them a waste of time, unreliable machine. I preferred to call it a labor of love…although “high maintenance” British motorcycle. It depends on your outlook and expectation IMHO. I dearly miss my Commando.:sunglasses:

Best regards.

There’s a difference between High Maintenance, and Unreliable.

High maintenance that can keep the machine operational is fine. As long as you can afford the maintenance and you keep up with it. If there is no breakdowns, and no stranding you 50 miles beyond the edge of nowhere.

Unreliability, is breakages and failures out of the blue, even with normal maintenance. You are left in a constant state of repair.

High Maintenance can be planned for, with computers or motor vehicles.

Unreliability can’t.

True, to a point. “High maintenance” is fine, as long as you are capable of said maintenance. If you are not, the “high maintenance” quickly translates to “unreliable”. My point stands.

Best regards.

Had every twin in the Norton range and many singles as well they were not that bad, reliability is in the mind 100,000 on my 750 Atlas with just routine maintenance only got 80,000 from a quaker and even less from Honda CBX1000 I think that relates very well

My Commando was reliable…never let me down. But w/o the required maintenance it would not have been. I don’t feel by todays “turn key” standards and owners expectations it would be deemed reliable. I am envious of your ownership of Nortons…I would love to find another. One of the big singles perhaps…or another Commando.:heart_eyes:

Best regards.

The big 500 single ES2 was fantastic they also made a 250 single forget the name but my fav was the 88ss twin very fast light and did not suffer damage if over revved like its big brothers. I also preferred the wideline featherbed just felt safer to me the mad man I was then. Later i owned a couple of commandos more of a tourer but lovelly bike and they still make a modern version today so they could not of been that bad?

Yes, I love the new Commandos…I dream of owning one. At $29,000 Canadian however, all I can do is dream.:disappointed:
Norton made a lot of singles, and were famous for their reliable war time machines. Later the Manx Norton 500cc single dominated the racing field. Quite a history behind Norton.

Sorry for taking this off-topic…but I love Nortons.

Best regards.

1 Like

I still wonder why so many Arch-derived distros can not unite and work together on a richer repository.


Developers like their autonomy. But they are actually working together more than it is obvious.


We made a discussion about a year ago with Arch users in a Facebook group. They claim Manjaro and other derivates dont suit to Arch philosphy. But I think technology should be accessible from everyone and Manjaro servicing this purpose. In fact Manjaro and other derivates also making very valuable contribution to Arch development.


Forum kindly sponsored by Bytemark