I was Nobara user, then I am using Fedora right now. I want to use things like Hyprland etc. and ya know, Its damn cool to say I am using arch btw. So I’ve decided to use Arch Linux. But everyone says its always breaking and gives problems. That’s because of users, not OS… right? I love to deal with problems but I don’t want to waste my time. Is Arch really problemful OS? Should I use it? I know what to do with setup/ usage, the hardness of Arch is not problem for me but I am just concerned about the mindset “Arch always gets broken”.
Then Arch is not for you. The distro requires you to always be informed of the latest news regarding Arch before upgrading so you’ll probably have to admin your system.
If you’re not ready to do that then you should probably stay with Fedora.
My suggestion: run arch in a virtual machine and get familiar with it before installing it.
I’m sorry but that is not true. Been using arch for 15+ years and update once a week without checking the “latest news”. In all those years I’ve had to manually intervene because of a file conflict maybe 5 times or so.
Of course arch runs but you have to take care of everything. You have to install flatpak etc. Yourself. You will only do that if you keep up to date with the system. On fedora, especially fedora atomic the maintainers take care of it and somewhat teach you. There’s much more than just flatpak. You have to know the system or being eager to research everything. It’s good to understand linux but not if you just want to own a computer and use a text editor and browser. I’m not op btw.
I don’t use flatpak so no idea about that.
But I use my system professionally so it just needs to work and I can’t be spending time fixing things. Luckily there is no need for that at all.
Not saying arch is the most noob friendly distro out there but I wholeheartedly disagree with people saying you need to spend lots of time fixing things or keeping your system stable as that is simply not true.