Imo it's more the other way around, but that's not necessarily bad. Arch (and Linux in general) gives you a lot more control, while windows tries to block the user from touching the internals. In my experience Arch breaks more often though, but when it breaks I can usually fix it. In Windows things usually work, but when they don't work you might be kinda screwed because the internals aren't that easy to reach.
post
Original had an Apple on the right.
More real Linux experience: Your car doesn't have a switch for the turn signals, instead it has a bunch of unlabeled wires under the hood to activate them. When asking around online, people complain about you not knowing it outright, and not hooking up an automated switch to it.
Even more real linux experience: The turn signal is well documented, labeled really obviously, and anyone will point you in the proper direction, but when you use them the brakes stop working because of an undocumented bug in a proprietary windshield wiper driver, and only you seem to have this problem.
Original had an Apple on the right.
That doesn't make sense, the hood on an Apple would be welded shut.
In the end people just complain that it's too complicated and just don't use the turn signals (seriously there's actually dumbasses who regularly or semi-regularly don't use their turn signals in real life).
I've had Arch implode on an upgrade and force a reinstall. Fuckin nah, bro.
I love Arch but come on
It's pretty stable but when it breaks it usually breaks spectacularly
My main desktop is arch in a VM, but every other system update it breaks steam's gpu usage so I'm finay switching to something more stable
all 50 comments