• M0oP0o@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    3 hours ago

    I made the mistake of going with Pop_OS for one of my stores workstations. Its been an almost endless amount of frustration with all the stupid shit Pop has done. Is it better then windows? sure, but its down there with arch as a usable OS in anything outside of an LTT video.

    • MagnificentSteiner@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      44 minutes ago

      Seems a bit of a self report that you’ve never used Arch IMO. I use it on a daily basis on 2 PCs and never have any issues. Arch is as good as the person using it.

      • M0oP0o@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        41 minutes ago

        When did I say I never used it? Its just not a good choice unless you really like to configure your Linux. For workstations that my staff (who are not interested in Linux or PCs at all) have to use, I go with things that are stable and easy like mint.

        • MagnificentSteiner@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          35 minutes ago

          Its just not a good choice unless you really like to configure your Linux.

          Yep, you have no clue.

          For workstations that my staff (who are not interested in Linux or PCs at all) have to use

          Nice Motte & Bailey fallacy retreating from the ridiculous statement that “…its down there with arch as a usable OS…” to try and seem more reasonable now.

          • M0oP0o@mander.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            10 minutes ago

            Yep, you have no clue.

            If I don’t want to fuck with the OS and if setting it up takes more then 15 min then its not a good choice, but please tell me to “get gud” about what I value in an OS. I am sure that is why so many people use arch over other distros, the kind support.

            Nice Motte & Bailey fallacy retreating from the ridiculous statement that “…its down there with arch as a usable OS…” to try and seem more reasonable now.

            That is why it is not a useable OS, 100% the fact that laypeople have to daily drive it. There was no retreating from me, not at all, I stand by my statement that arch is not a usable OS for workstations. And before you try and say that “for workstations” is some sort of moving the goalposts, I made the statement on arch not being usable in a comment about putting distros on my stores workstations.