Isn’t archwiki one of the most comprehended wikis for Linux distros out there? If anything, the arch-wiki (to me) has often too many answers for the same problem than the other way around.
I switched like ten years ago because I wanted to learn the details, but in all honesty I still feel like I barely understand anything. Not sure how normal this is, maybe I’m unusually dumb, but I feel like what I’ve really learned is how to troubleshoot and solve issues by reading documentation and tinkering, rather than understanding what I’m actually doing. I’ve had a stable system for years but I kind of feel like if a typical arch forum poster looked my system configuration for five minutes they’d be like wtf are you doing.
It is most comprehended, but for newbie it is too comprehensive. Its overwhelming, I tried to troubleshoot why I boot to black screen even the installation said its successful and there’s no error. I saw solutions that want me edit grub, edit xorg … and some other file that I never understand.
I understand the wiki is very good and very important, its just not newbie friendly.
Isn’t archwiki one of the most comprehended wikis for Linux distros out there? If anything, the arch-wiki (to me) has often too many answers for the same problem than the other way around.
[This comment has been deleted by an automated system]
I switched like ten years ago because I wanted to learn the details, but in all honesty I still feel like I barely understand anything. Not sure how normal this is, maybe I’m unusually dumb, but I feel like what I’ve really learned is how to troubleshoot and solve issues by reading documentation and tinkering, rather than understanding what I’m actually doing. I’ve had a stable system for years but I kind of feel like if a typical arch forum poster looked my system configuration for five minutes they’d be like wtf are you doing.
If you know where to look and where to tinker, then I think you have at least some understanding of what you’re doing.
[This comment has been deleted by an automated system]
Is actually great since it forces you to learn which saves you much more time in the long run.
But most people can’t see past their nose.
Edit
Can’t believe somebody got offended by this…
couldve stopped at the first sentence, but had to keep with the stereotype i guess ;)
??
Smug sense of superiority. You’re special and do things the right way because everyone else is too dumb.
Jesus fucking christ what a bunch of drama queens
you’re doing a really good job of breaking this stereotype, bub
To be fair, your original comment would have been more likely to push people towards trying Arch if it didn’t have the last sentence.
You can’t invite people to your party by antagonizing them.
It is great when you have time to learn, but when you are trying to troubleshoot while understand basically nothing of the wiki … it is not good.
[This comment has been deleted by an automated system]
Can’t believe you got so offended someone was offended you edited your comment…
to be fair, i wasnt offened :) just wanted to point out the irony
oh nooo, you weren’t offended at all (:
I’m not in just tired to deal with whiny bitches
I run Debian and I regularly look at the Arch wiki.
It is most comprehended, but for newbie it is too comprehensive. Its overwhelming, I tried to troubleshoot why I boot to black screen even the installation said its successful and there’s no error. I saw solutions that want me edit grub, edit xorg … and some other file that I never understand.
I understand the wiki is very good and very important, its just not newbie friendly.
deleted by creator
That’s the issue. Arch and it’s wiki are labyrinths for beginners.
For anyone not interested in tinkering all-day long they’re better off using fedora, debian or suse.
True