Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by gamache 3348 days ago
For what it's worth, I tried a few different OSes, including Ubuntu 16.10 (which was the latest at the time), before settling on 16.04 LTS (which was released a year after the laptop came out). I plan to try 17.04 when I get some time, but I also expect to be disappointed. I got about 10min into an Arch install before laughing myself into a coma -- I've seen smoother Unix installs from the 1990s.

But I will reiterate: this is clown shoes. Expecting this kind of effort from desktop users is hostile.

1 comments

I'll agree the the Arch installer could be better, but its not difficult, especially having done it a few times. The install starts pretty barebones and then you add on what you need - annoying if you want a 1-click to fully setup GNOME (or whatever) desktop, but perfect for people like me. You also get the benefit of learning how all the parts of a working Linux desktop come together.

Personally I find all-in-one installers annoying. I find I have to spend a ton of time removing crap I don't want and replacing it with what I do want. It would take me probably as much time or more to install and configure Ubuntu as Arch would.

You might want to check out Fedora too -- I hear the latest release is pretty great. Arch based distributions like Antergos or Manjaro might be good to check out if your only hangup with Arch is the arcane installer.