Originally posted by Nocifer
View Post
Long-winded attempt to ascribe derogatory characteristics to a person or group: What's this called?

Personally, as I've mentioned before, I use multiple distros for different purposes. Nevertheless, at the risk of sounding like yet another fan-boy, I would welcome a shift of focus from Valve toward supporting Arch.
* Arch is great because of its use of tar archives and bash scripts in terms of packaging.
* Community involvement is great in terms of software availability (projects, e.g. steam-native), testing, support, documentation.
* Rolling release ensures early access to available updates from upstream projects, hardware drivers, etc.
* Less restrictive copyleft policies allow for wider range of software offerings
Btw, this is all done almost entirely as a community Linux distribution project. There is a strong foundation in place already that Valve could take advantage of and build upon. It's, obviously, not perfect; the installation process is a barrier to entry for newcomers, as was pointed out here already. However, if that's the only argument against using Arch in favour of Ubuntu, then it has to be pointed out for what it is; i.e. a short-sighted criticism based on personal disdain for the loudest users/supporters of Arch--and on an issue that can be resolved with an installation script or GUI installer even--while overlooking all other benefits that Arch provides.
Ultimately, I'm sure there are other real or potential pitfalls or reasons for why Arch has not been chosen as the official distro in the past or even in the future. However, it should be said, it behooves us all to weigh (check) how we ourselves stand up to the criticisms and aspersions that we hurl toward others.
P.S. I am aware of the irony in berating long-winded criticisms with a long-winded, albeit less specific and wider in scope, critique.
Leave a comment: