Arch Dev Team Interview

[~sHyLoCk~]

Yet another Arch thread?
Yes but the intention is NOT the same. I found the answers funny, amusing and cool and thought I'd share with those who haven't already read this.
http://www.osnews.com/story/22692/Arch_Linux_Team/page1/

PS- Allan's answers are awesome! :D

[A_T]

Tried Arch - didn't like it. Ubuntu is much better

[kahumba]

Those answers are so chip and "half-truthy", in short:
Question: why no .iso installer
Answer: there's no need for them

Question: Why can't get Arch installed quickly
Answer: no one needs it

Question: not friendly enough
Answer: we don't need being friendly and it's even harmful
etc. etc. etc. + the typical stupid fanboish "bravado".

Reminds me of Sun Microsystems' responses in the days when Java was slow it was claiming that speed isn't really needed, the only thing that matters is security.

These types of "half-truths" are so typical for those in trouble and don't wanna face it so they revert to sarcasm, bravado, that "they're different" and other stupid stuff.

[samjh]

Good interview.


Those answers are so chip and "half-truthy", in short:
Question: why no .iso installer
Answer: there's no need for them

Question: Why can't get Arch installed quickly
Answer: no one needs it

Question: not friendly enough
Answer: we don't need being friendly and it's even harmful
etc. etc. etc. + the typical stupid fanboish "bravado".Only if you are reading it with an anti-Arch bias. The answers they gave seem quite reasonable to me.

This pretty much sums it up for me:

[T]here are a lot of people out there driving cars. The majority of them are intimidated by looking under the hood. Arch Linux is targetting people who are not.

[~sHyLoCk~]

Well the answers are not half-truths or "chip". They are facts and genuine! At-least Arch Developers don't sugarcoat their replies or try to cover up their development goals by lying to public. Arch has a specific goal and the developers have been performing their tasks quite well for years now. Arch is not for newbies and they ask newbies to stay away from Arch in their Homepage by suggesting that it is for intermediate users who want complete control over their system! It is not Arch's fault if you fail to install or use it!

NB: I don't want to make this thread into another Arch vs <insert distro here> thread. The idea was to share the humor and amusing replies with the Archers here.

[samjh]

NB: I don't want to make this thread into another Arch vs <insert distro here> thread. The idea was to share the humor and amusing replies with the Archers here.

Frankly, I'm not surprised that this thread has already attracted anti-Arch sentiments.

A lot of people on these forums have gone from Ubuntu to Arch, and then frequently posted positive feedback and referrals about Arch here. There has been a backlash against that.

[kahumba]

Well the answers are not half-truths or "chip". They are facts and genuine!
Not half truths? Oh really?
Quick question, how many % use a single OS version "for years" without upgrading it to newer releases? Fact is, very few people, cause if your distro is 5 years no one cares much about compatibility with you. Last 5 years changed the Linux desktop by leaps and bounds, yet his answer was approximately "since the OS is gonna be used for years..", I bet even the "Arch user" upgrades his OS more often than that, so that's a brand half truth. I don't bother suggesting other ones, since it's actually you biased, not me, I don't care about OSes, not even Ubuntu despite using it as my main OS, I do care however when people deliver only parts of truths that suit them, that's so old fashioned.

[sisco311]

Great interview!


Not half truths? Oh really?
Quick question, how many % use a single OS version "for years" without upgrading it to newer releases? Fact is, very few people, cause if your distro is 5 years no one cares much about compatibility with you. Last 5 years changed the Linux desktop by leaps and bounds, yet his answer was approximately "since the OS is gonna be used for years..", I bet even the "Arch user" upgrades his OS more often than that, so that's a brand half truth. I don't bother suggesting other ones, since it's actually you biased, not me, I don't care about OSes, not even Ubuntu despite using it as my main OS, I do care however when people deliver only parts of truths that suit them, that's so old fashioned.

Archlinux uses a rolling release (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolling_release) system. ;)

[snowpine]

Great interview, Shylock, thanks for the link!

[sertse]

NB: I don't want to make this thread into another Arch vs <insert distro here> thread. The idea was to share the humor and amusing replies with the Archers here.

(I originally had a longer post, but forum went down on me when I was submitting it...)

Sorry ~sHyLock~, had to tag it, the replies made it inevitable. (and guess I outed myself as the one tagging some of the other threads too, heh..) - Edit, detagged, it isn't too bad yet. I don't wanna be the bad tagging guy, maybe someone else if they feel it needs it...

I personally enjoyed the interview. The dev seem confident of their distro, it's future and what they're doing. Looking toward to the improvements...

[~sHyLoCk~]

Not half truths? Oh really?
Quick question, how many % use a single OS version "for years" without upgrading it to newer releases? Fact is, very few people, cause if your distro is 5 years no one cares much about compatibility with you. Last 5 years changed the Linux desktop by leaps and bounds, yet his answer was approximately "since the OS is gonna be used for years..", I bet even the "Arch user" upgrades his OS more often than that, so that's a brand half truth. I don't bother suggesting other ones, since it's actually you biased, not me, I don't care about OSes, not even Ubuntu despite using it as my main OS, I do care however when people deliver only parts of truths that suit them, that's so old fashioned.

Honestly your post makes no sense at all. I know you typed in English but still it's quite difficult to make a proper meaning out of what you are implying. "Upgrade" PC as in what? Hardware? Software? Do you even know what "rolling-release" means? Plus, you are misquoting their replies, don't do that. Type the exact question along with the answers you had problems understanding! The exact words and not your version!
Again, I'll ask everyone not to troll this topic, not an Arch fan? Stay out of it! Or I'll tell KiwiNZ. ;)


Great interview, Shylock, thanks for the link!

You're welcome! I came to know about it from [arch-dev-public] :)

[Hallvor]

Interesting to read the interview. The developers have a lot of common sense. They make a distro for intermediate users, target them and stick with it.

[~sHyLoCk~]

Interesting to read the interview. The developers have a lot of common sense. They make a distro for intermediate users, target them and stick with it.

Now this is a sensible, to-the-point, correct comment, that also coming from someone who doesn't use Arch! You're totally right! :popcorn:

[snowpine]

It's easy to think of software as a detached, non-human entity that either works or doesn't work. This interview was a good reminder of the human side of the story, the personality behind the distro.

[Name change]

Yet another Arch thread?
Yes but the intention is NOT the same. I found the answers funny, amusing and cool and thought I'd share with those who haven't already read this.
http://www.osnews.com/story/22692/Arch_Linux_Team/page1/

PS- Allan's answers are awesome! :D
Thanks! I'm really enjoying it.
It's just one more reason why I like Arch so much.

@kahumba: Don't attack blindly something you don't know, it makes you look stupid.

[gutterslob]

@OP
Thanks for the link.
It was a good read....and yes, witty answers.

[MisfitI38]

Not half truths? Oh really?
Quick question, how many % use a single OS version "for years" without upgrading it to newer releases? Fact is, very few people, cause if your distro is 5 years no one cares much about compatibility with you.
Actually, this assumption is completely false. Arch users upgrade constantly, without reinstalling. This was also mentioned by Aaron Griffin, the project leader; install once, upgrade often.
Arch is a rolling release. You may want to try Arch to familiarize yourself with the concept.

Personally, I am using the same Arch install since 2006, and I have the latest stable version of every package on my system..without ever reinstalling.

So, the premise that the system may be used for years is in fact entirely accurate. :)

[Pogeymanz]

Good read. I'm surprised nobody mentioned tacos...

[SuperSonic4]

Allan McRae: People. Prescription == Getting rid of people.

Gold

[adeypoop]

interview ? or 6 page long advert for how great Arch is compared to other distros ? I got as far as page 3 or something, can't help feeling there is a little too much 'elitism' in their bias though

[samjh]

interview ? or 6 page long advert for how great Arch is compared to other distros ? I got as far as page 3 or something, can't help feeling there is a little too much 'elitism' in their bias though

There is always a sense of bias and pride with these types of interviews. They are developers, and they like what they help to create, so it's natural that they promote it. But unlike pure marketing or advertising, they didn't put on a facade and try to hide the negative aspects of the distro or make weak excuses about them.

[handy]

Yet another Arch thread?
Yes but the intention is NOT the same. I found the answers funny, amusing and cool and thought I'd share with those who haven't already read this.
http://www.osnews.com/story/22692/Arch_Linux_Team/page1/

PS- Allan's answers are awesome! :D

Thanks for posting the link ~sHyLoCk~, I thoroughly enjoyed it. :D

[~sHyLoCk~]

interview ? or 6 page long advert for how great Arch is compared to other distros ? I got as far as page 3 or something, can't help feeling there is a little too much 'elitism' in their bias though

Read the first paragraph:

Interview: Arch Linux Team
Linked by Jordan Spencer Cunningham on Mon 11th Jan 2010 15:57 UTC
A few weeks ago, we asked for the OSNews community to help with some questions we were going to ask Aaron Griffin from the Arch Linux team, and the response was glorious and somewhat phenomenal. We added those questions to our own and sent them on over, and then we were surprised by receiving not only Aaron Griffin's responses but answers from various individuals from the team.

Trust me, Arch Devs have better things to do with their time [like packaging :P], than advertise their distro, that also in OSNews!

@handy,gutterslob,Primož Papič

You are welcome! I am glad you enjoyed reading this, as much as I did. :)



Good read. I'm surprised nobody mentioned tacos...
Yeah, no tacos! :o

[handy]

@~sHyLoCk~: I've already posted the link in OSTalk.org :)

Gave you credit though. ;)

[handy]

There is always a sense of bias and pride with these types of interviews. They are developers, and they like what they help to create, so it's natural that they promote it. But unlike pure marketing or advertising, they didn't put on a facade and try to hide the negative aspects of the distro or make weak excuses about them.

The attitude was Arch - like it or lump it!

We obviously like it. (that speaks for the dev's & the users)

[~sHyLoCk~]

@~sHyLoCk~: I've already posted the link in OSTalk.org :)

Gave you credit though. ;)

cool ;)

[aaaantoine]

interview ? or 6 page long advert for how great Arch is compared to other distros ? I got as far as page 3 or something, can't help feeling there is a little too much 'elitism' in their bias though

The "greatness" of Arch is only relevant if you're among the target audience of the distro.

Some people don't like to tinker. I don't like tinkering much, either. The only reason I'm still using Arch is because I like the rolling release model. -- Basically, I prefer small breakages distributed throughout the year over massive breakages every six months. ;)

[SuperSonic4]

There is always a sense of bias and pride with these types of interviews. They are developers, and they like what they help to create, so it's natural that they promote it. But unlike pure marketing or advertising, they didn't put on a facade and try to hide the negative aspects of the distro or make weak excuses about them.

That's because there are laws governing advertisements and marketing. Trust me, if a company did not have to tell you the small print they would not!

[Pogeymanz]

interview ? or 6 page long advert for how great Arch is compared to other distros ? I got as far as page 3 or something, can't help feeling there is a little too much 'elitism' in their bias though

I'm sorry, but that's just silly. If I asked the Ubuntu devs about their distro, do you not think that they would give me responses that were in favor of Ubuntu? It isn't an ad unless it's produced by the Arch devs. It's just an interview.

[kevCast]

Haters gonna hate.

[phawnex]

arch is pretty dope, still getting used to the new environment. but definitely solid. i like ubuntu cuz im still a newb in Linux, but archLinux is something ill be using a lot more of once i get some more experience under my belt.

[~sHyLoCk~]

still getting used to the new environment. but definitely solid. i like ubuntu cuz im still a newb in Linux, but archLinux is something ill be using a lot more of once i get some more experience under my belt.

Once you start using it, arch is gonnabe easy! Trust me, most rumours against Arch are FUD! It's just installing your base system, installing, X, apps and then editing a few files! All these steps are well-documented in wiki! Even I have written Arch install guide for newbies. Anyway, maintaining it is as easy as typing "pacman -Syu" in terminalonce in a while after reading the Arch news!;)

[handy]

@phawnex: dotpac (http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Dotpac) is a useful package for handling the often confusing for new Arch user .pacnew & .pacsave files.

There are 6 useful & mostly important how-to for Arch to be found in here:

http://www.ostalk.org/forumdisplay.php?fid=18&page=1

[GreyShadow]

thanks for the link on X as this where I am stuck at now.

I'm learning more about Linux by using (trying to install) Arch than I would
with the usual preconfigured distros. When I have time it is fun to fiddle!

[~sHyLoCk~]

thanks for the link on X as this where I am stuck at now.

I'm learning more about Linux by using (trying to install) Arch than I would
with the usual preconfigured distros. When I have time it is fun to fiddle!

Best would be to use virtualbox within your current distro and then try setting up Arch, so that if you mess up you are not left with a system which doesn't work. After you successfully install it, the you can replace Arch with whatever you have now! ;-)

[red_Marvin]

I quite liked the read, thanks.

[phawnex]

thanks for the links handy.

i got it installed successfully in virtualbox, no issues. now its just being able to get it up and running. i am still stuck on the repositories lol. (ima linux newbie) lol

stuck on setting it up. just have it installed, didnt even set up repositories. i read some stuff on a website, but still am slightly confused.

ill take a look at the link, thanks bro

[handy]

Everything is in the Beginners' Guide. Follow it closely & you should be fine.

[Dj Melik]

Why are Ubuntu users getting so offended? I don't get it.

[kelvin spratt]

Arch for me is simplicity since 2006.

[SuperSonic4]

Once you start using it, arch is gonnabe easy! Trust me, most rumours against Arch are FUD! It's just installing your base system, installing, X, apps and then editing a few files! All these steps are well-documented in wiki! Even I have written Arch install guide for newbies. Anyway, maintaining it is as easy as typing "pacman -Syu" in terminalonce in a while after reading the Arch news!;)

I agree. Once arch is set up it is incredibly easy to maintain, far more than running a dist-upgrade every 6 months.