Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ubuntu vs. Arch Linux On The ASUS ROG Strix G15 / Ryzen 9 5900HX

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #21
    Originally posted by Linuxxx View Post
    What most Arch Linux fans fail to realize is that most PC users do NOT want to babysit their OS all day long; they want to setup once and then be good to go!
    I'm quite sure that most Arch Linux uses DO realize that Arch has a somewhat steeper entry barrier and occasionally requires some manual intervention. On the other hand, if Arch had a graphical installer and package manager, it'd make a splendid desktop distro for a lot of average users. The fact that Arch always ships the recent software makes a lot easier to install on recent hardware and even when there is a problem, you can usually rely on it getting fixed in a future update. Versioned distros are much more problematic in this regard. If an average user got this ASUS ROG laptop and tried to put Ubuntu on it, they'd walk away with the impression that this Linux is a real pile of garbage. Arch, on the other hand, would work fine and it'd provide recent Mesa for the best 3D performance as a bonus.

    Originally posted by SilverFox View Post
    Could this be a case of arch linux having PREEMPT_RT switched on by default?
    Arch does not have PREEMPT_RT enabled by default. I'd bet that most of the benchmark differences could be chalked up to GCC 10 on Ubuntu vs. GCC 11 on Arch.

    Comment


    • #22
      Originally posted by old_skull View Post

      5 minutes every week AFTER spending god knows how much setting up the whole thing is not babysitting? So how do I teach my wife doing all this, or do I have to spend 5 minutes every weekend on every PC in my house?

      What an incredible take. Do you really not get it?
      It's not much different than doing an update on a Fedora or Debian system and being asked random questions in the middle of the install about replacing dependencies, potentially unnecessary packages, seeing commands you may have to run in a terminal afterwards, etc.

      Do you expect your wife to know what font package she needs to keep, which Java interpreter to pick, which Python version to use, which GStreamer backend to pick? So, yes, you'll probably have to spend 5 minutes on every PC in your house if you want someone who knows what's what making those kinds of choices.

      For me it takes up to two hours to fully get a system up and running to my liking with minor maintenance at update time regardless of the distribution or OS. Zsh and themes and plugins and programs and services and settings take time after the first install no matter what I'm running.

      Even on Windows I have to spend an extra 5 minutes reinstalling the AMD driver once a week/every major 11 update. When Windows 11 updates it overrides the AMD driver with its version which breaks the Catalyst App. The driver 11 comes with gives me more problems than the driver from AMD.

      Yes, y'all, I told the Windows Update settings to not do that. They did not listen to me.

      Comment


      • #23
        Originally posted by old_skull View Post

        5 minutes every week AFTER spending god knows how much setting up the whole thing is not babysitting? So how do I teach my wife doing all this, or do I have to spend 5 minutes every weekend on every PC in my house?

        What an incredible take. Do you really not get it?
        Ok, you have a point but you are also taking some wrong assumptions.

        Any distro is equally hard to maintain what changes is how you choose to handle the maintenance.

        Few corrections:

        1.) ArchLinux don't force anything upon you, if you wanna update every 5 years, you just can update every 5 years or every 5 minutes, is up to you.
        2.) Pure ArchLinux may require more effort upfront but it can literally last forever afterwards(writing from my ArchLinux installed on 2012)

        So, LTS or ArchLinux, is just about which compromise you choose and what software you (will) need, Ubuntu requires less of you upfront but you pay it down the line either dealing with upgrade scripts that may become difficult or being stuck on certain software version that do not fit your requirements anymore and has become very hard to upgrade without a full distro upgrade.

        Additionally, you have issues that will apply to both but again is about what you choose

        1.) Regardless of the distro if a package version change require a new configuration, this will be true in Ubuntu or Arch, the only difference is Arch give you the option to adopt it when you want while Ubuntu will force it upon you the next version.

        2.) Upstream issues will affect you eventually, may be sooner or later but they will.

        So, in the end if you usage case fit the LTS system and your software selection is little or not affected over time for your needs then is perfectly fine to avoid the upfront cost of ArchLinux, on the other hand if you benefit from new features on software and want to stay closer to it ArchLinux will prove worth it once you pass that initial cost because ArchLinux is about total user control.

        So, choose the compromise that fit you best.

        Comment


        • #24
          Originally posted by old_skull View Post

          5 minutes every week AFTER spending god knows how much setting up the whole thing is not babysitting? So how do I teach my wife doing all this, or do I have to spend 5 minutes every weekend on every PC in my house?

          What an incredible take. Do you really not get it?
          FWIW, editing the configuration files on my Debian system often requires a lot more effort and knowledge. Arch seems to have a really barebones solution by just making a copy and delegating all work to the user. Of course, oftentimes the configuration files don't need any changes in Debian, but once they do, there's a similar process. I'm well aware that Debian's system is much more advanced, but the fact that this other distro contains up to date packages also has its merits. Get it?

          I should also mention that I also have one Windows 10 PC, and updating Windows takes around 30 mins every week. It also forces a reboot. It also does funny things like forces to close down software in order to upgrade. So, Windows is the worst offender when it comes to wasting your spare time.
          Last edited by caligula; 25 July 2021, 01:40 PM.

          Comment


          • #25
            Originally posted by Linuxxx View Post
            That is the reason why the Ubuntu LTS base is so popular in the Linux world (including all derivatives like Linux Mint):
            You get to enjoy an enterprise-grade foundation that is properly tested across a very wide userbase.
            Enterprise-grade? Properly tested?
            I had more issues with Ubuntu (even LTS!) than other distros in my life:

            1. Sometimes icons in the top right bar disappear. Sometimes it is the clock, sometimes weather, sometimes volume control and sometimes even the power button.
            2. Sometimes the desktop does not start all of a sudden, and is completely unusable. And often this is right after installation without any modifications!
            3. APT nearly wiped out my entire system due to its "held broken package" feature. It does not even know how to replace a package.

            Not saying Arch is perfect, because it has its issues too:

            1. Breakage, breakage, breakage. Few packages actually specify dependency on a specific version of a library, so when you update ICU or some other unstable library that breaks version number on every update, good luck with the rest of packages.
            2. Sometimes I don't want to upgrade a package because the new version has more issues (e.g. Mesa 19.1 is less stable for me than 19.0), but at some point you will be forced to upgrade.
            3. The system for having multiple versions of a library is there (!!!) but gets unused. As an example all libraries are versioned, the unversioned .so are symlinks to the latest versioned version and applications link against the current versioned version; yet pacman CANNOT install two versions of a library at once.
            Last edited by tildearrow; 25 July 2021, 08:41 PM.

            Comment


            • #26
              Looks like the ASUS ROG Strix G17 / Ryzen 9 5900HX has been sold out b/f it came out? ? ?

              Comment


              • #27
                Well. I use Arch because of the rolling release. More than five years ago, I came from Fedora. I was fed up with the upgrade cycle, basically a new install, every half year. I was using Gentoo for more than seven years before Fedora. So, I was spoiled with a rolling release before. But Gentoo was going through a rough patch at the end. So, I was so fed up having a broken systems every few days/weeks. An upgrade every half year seemed not so a burden at that time. But after two years Fedora I start looking again. Found Arch. After a few months of fiddling, I already started copying my install to other systems. Rsync over ssh, a systemd-boot and I was up and running. I didn't do a clean installation for almost more than four years now. I see people often complain about Arch and claiming it to be unstable. This is not my experience.

                Funny thing, I never managed to do a Debian or Ubuntu install without problem. But that is pure my opinion, also I didn't try for years. So maybe this has changed.
                Last edited by markus40; 25 July 2021, 04:10 PM.

                Comment


                • #28
                  Originally posted by Qaridarium

                  isn't Gentoo made because the Laws of countries like USA force companies like RedHat to put government trojan horse in any pre-compiled software binaries and by this the victims of this government actions install the Government trojan horse in the moment they intsall normal security fixes. they believe they increase their security by installing security fixes and in reality by this they install the government tojan horse.

                  Gentoo in this meaning is the only secure Linux distro because the law force the companies like Canonical and redhat are forced to put tojan horse into compiled binaries but they are not forced to put trojan horses into source-code

                  because by law source-code is handled like "text" and if you buy a book means "text" the book store is also not forced to print a new book version with a mental brain virus inside of it.

                  Because Gentoo use this "source code= Text" loophole it is maybe the most secure distro against Rogue government spy agencies.
                  This whole post is a joke, right?
                  It has to be.

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    Originally posted by tomas View Post

                    This whole post is a joke, right?
                    It has to be.
                    I think Q actually has serious mental issues and legitimately believes every conspiracy theory he's ever heard. It's usually best to just ignore his posts.

                    He often posts blatantly racist stuff too, and gets banned for a week, but then Michael welcomes him back and he just posts more racist stuff.

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      Originally posted by smitty3268 View Post

                      I think Q actually has serious mental issues and legitimately believes every conspiracy theory he's ever heard. It's usually best to just ignore his posts.

                      He often posts blatantly racist stuff too, and gets banned for a week, but then Michael welcomes him back and he just posts more racist stuff.
                      Michael puts him in again, time after time. Those people guarantee more views and comments, more money than with a reasonable person writing there.
                      Last edited by Nth_man; 25 July 2021, 05:01 PM.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X