WorMzy Tykashi <wormzy.tykashi@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >On 11 February 2014 00:00, Jeremy Nicoll - ml archlinux ><jn.ml.alx.581@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > > I've been lurking on this maillist for maybe a year, after reading > > somewhere that Arch might be a good solution for me as a linux newbie. > > I disagree with your source. If anything, Arch Linux is aimed at > experienced Linux users... I don't think that that is the impression that one gets from the Archlinux website, where it starts with: "You've reached the website for Arch Linux, a lightweight and flexible Linux distribution that tries to Keep It Simple." but I see that the last paragraph of the 'About' page ends by saying: "designed to fit the needs of the competent Linux user." which seems to echo what you (and others) have said. I think what attracted me was probably the stated lack of GUI config utilities, with most stuff configured by editing text files - it's what I was used to in eg MVS. And from what I've seen of the linuxen that attempt to look like Windows, there's too many GUI config utilities that only expose a small proportion of the options that a config file could contain. I also greatly dislike GUI config utilities (in any OS) that destroy any comments or change histories which one might have placed in those text files. Also, the 'rolling release' approach sits better with me than the potentially catastrophic approach where one is forced to upgrade the whole OS every so often. > who at least know the basic ins-and-outs of a Linux-based operating > system I know very little about linux, but a great deal about MVS. I've never expected to learn an new OS quickly but instead to learn and end up understanding how the successive layers of the OS work. > > It seems to me that this captcha stops potential linux users, as opposed > > to those who do have a working system, from joining your forum. > > Arch has no aims to be popular. Hmm. -- Jeremy C B Nicoll - my opinions are my own.
