What did you guys think of the ”utility boost” towards the end of the video? Yay or nay? Also if !subscribed: print(”What are you even doing mate, subscribeee”) subscribe() else: print(”Heyyo”)
I’m an arch purest BUT I love this distro it’s so simple and saves a TONE of time. If they keep The AUR, pamac, and other little utilities and cut out the extras, this will be the best distro. Manjaro is super bloated and sluggish. Garuda is just slightly too resource heavy. Or you can just start trimming the fat with sudo pacman -Rr until something breaks. EDIT: there is a barebones edition, pretty much the best distro I've tried in a while
@@kattihatt are you having a bad day or something? I don't think the commenter was trying to be rude. He's just using a template to make a funny comment
I personally am an arch purist, I've been using pure arch for 3 years now, tried all kinds of distros but always came back to arch because all other distros did stuff that annoyed me a lot. I think I'm gonna give Garuda a shot now as it looks like a project that I personally thought about doing myself (making an out of the box usable arch installation).
Bro I’m a 17 year old kid i wanna learn programming please help me out by recommending what should i learn first on linux as in language and what applications should i install to develop a program
You're wrong about needing to install extra stuff on Arch whenever you install a package - you're using a package manager either way, which manages dependencies, so installing firefox on arch and ubuntu is pretty much the same.
Maybe he's never heard of pacman. Seriously, when I install new software on my Arch system, all I do is pacman -S and the system does the rest, installing dependencies, default config files, etc. I really don't understand what this guy is talking about.
Arch (via pacman/pamac) also handles dependencies, just like apt or yum do. Manjaro/Garuda are great for people who aren't experts in Linux. (Garuda also can be easily set up for backup imaging in case it breaks via Timeshift) The real big difference between the other Distros for Arch-based distros is that Arch (and Garuda and Manjaro) are rolling releases. These keep the packages very up to date, compared to others. It does have a chance to break your install, though. That doesn't happen often anymore, but it can.
Manjaro Linux is the standard Arch-Based distro for new users. I recommend giving that a look first, because it's such an established product as compared to Garuda which is very new, and has an uncertain future.
i tried garuda for 3 days. I crashed like 7 times while running a node js server and some tabs on brave + visual studio code. its a distro only for looks, the performance and usage is very very bad
I used Manjaro KDE as my daily driver for about 8 months on my laptop. It was pretty good but after a while I found it annoying that there were any good tiling managers for it. I wound up swapping to Pop OS and I might swap to Manjaro Gnome with pop tiling extension. That feels like it could be a good idea.
9:57 this is not rly accurate, the default arch package manager 'pacman' works like any other package manager and installs all the dependencies the package needs. Same is the case with aur managers like 'yay'.
Here's my take on what Kalle is trying to say. For a specific package A, there might be at least 3 types of dependencies, (1) the required dependencies, (2) the recommended deps, and (3) the suggested deps. On distros like Ubuntu, apt-get usually installs package A along with the above (1), (2), and (3) dependencies. However, on Arch, pacman will only install the package A along with the type (1) dependencies only. The type (2) and (3) dependencies are called 'optional dependencies' or 'optdepends' in the Arch-way. Please correct me wherever I was wrong. Hope this helps. Have a great day everyone :)
That's how it used to be, to run Arch was to be familiar with the Terminal, and wiki, not anymore, I've had Garuda for a few days, fully setup, and customized...without the Terminal, I only used that to download Blackarch's repository, other than that, I didn't type Sudo or Pacman 1 time.
I tried Garuda after I watched this video. I had mostly only used Windows before. It cost me a lot of time to configure everything to be what I like it to be(like themes, input method). But now it becomes my main system.
In my experience , the more bling and custom apps that come with a big distro, the greater the chances for problems over time - especially after a major Kde, Plasma, display manager, or package manager update.
If you don't like bloat, there's a bare-bones version for Garuda Linux, which just installs pure (means literally) Arch Linux(using calemeres) for you with btrfs + timeshift preconfigured + software like ananicy & nohang + ZRAM enabled by default chaotic aur + Garuda welcome utility
i mean manjaro isnt really an arch based distro, i mean it uses pacman but the repositories are manjaro's not arch's like arco endevour etc which misses the whole point of an arch based distro
Oh come on, Arch is not difficult to install, if it were looked at in a vacuum then sure, but there are a ton of guides where you if you don't know how to install, can just follow along and will have a working Arch system with KDE or Gnome or whichever DE (or WM, but that's not really for beginners) you choose. That means, first time spending 30-60 minutes following a tutorial (30 because it's your first time+15 if you get stuck at some step for some reason + 15 if your internet is slow) and learning a ton while also having a working arch system Second time you install arch, any guide will be just a reminder for stuff and you can do it in 20-40 minutes. After that the installation really is fast, if you exclude installation of desktop environment (which is literally one command, but takes time because of downloading and installing a lot of packages) then you can easily install arch in under 10 minutes, did it multiple times on many machines.
@@aniketraj4823 yes, but almost everyone who installs arch, first time they use the tutorial. It's not meant to first time give you info about options, first time you learn what is actually happening in instalation instead of following GUI, you learn about bootloaders(which means you'll later know that you can choose either one you want), you learn a bit more about usergroups and sudo(which means you'll later know there are also doas and similar alternatives), you learn about partitioning(which will help you later understand about LVM which you might choose on next installation) etc... It's just important to first time follow some generic tutorial, not some special that will immediatelly force those stuff, like different bootloader or LVM or whatever as that way you might not learn about how many things function. First time I also followed a tutorial, it helped me understand how the installation process for a distro worrks.
So usually the issue is not following the guide itself. Just because it worked the first time for you on your system, it doesn't mean that it will work for everyone. Over the years I have installed Arch on several different machines and many are not really friendly to arch Linux installation process. Sometimes, especially on laptops, the installation process throws up some random error on some step. For example, on my laptop the arch-chroot command does not work for some weird reason and I have to manually rbind and make-rslave on the sys folder to chroot into my install, steps which I actually know from installing Gentoo. There is no way a newbie will be able to figure stuff like that by simply watching some guide. They will have to dive deep into the arch wiki and the less knowledgeable you are about linux, the more time this will take.
After watching this video, I got curious with Garuda and jump ship to try my first arch-based linux. During work, I give time to setup up our web app here on Garuda. Took me a while to run our company web app system built on kinda oldish stack, AngularJs and Laravel. The spending of hours is real. I dont mind it, coz my thirst to know more about this system weighs more. And the last thing is its worth trying Garuda so thanks for this video
Garuda is a good and simple way for people to try out arch in a different and more simplicities way. It’s also a good stepping stone to one day taking the plunge on other arch variants despite what elitists and would-be purists might say. As someone who has been working with multiple distros of Linux since the 90s I found Garuda to be an easier and clean starter arch distro.
There's manjaro minimal iso version too which has less bloat and you can make it no bloat very easily , Garuda also has bare bones edition which like manjaro minimal or endeavour os has very minimal bloat which is actually useful for a new user.
@@papiyabasu1564 absolutely, they all offer easy installation process. Plus Manjaro also offers stability as it's not bleeding edge but takes times before pushing updates.
I have been following you for 2 years now and i have been a linux user for 4 years or so, so i know part of your linux journey , and I am glad the way you have informed yourself about distrros and DEs and also convey via your channel Commemdable 👏👏👏
I would disagree with the point of “Debian or Fedora install extra stuff with the package you want but Arch don’t”. For example in ubuntu there is a gcc package and a g++ package. Whereas in Arch g++ is a part of gcc. Also in Ubuntu there is separate packages for users and devs, so there is a package for pulseaudio and pulseaudio-dev. Whereas in Arch there is one pulse audio package and that package includes everything even the dev stuff (headers and libraries). So i would disagree as it is literally the other way around.
@@karimfadi flatpaks and snaps are the only thing you should (if you dont wanna mess with firejail) use to download proprietary software like discord , chrome, zoom, teams, etc, because they are containerised, the apps can not tell anything about your system, so more secure. flatpaks are alright, opensource, good packagers, only downside being their runtimes are frigging huge i.e. can end up 2-3gb of runtime after 3-4 apps, but the thing with snaps is their core is closed source and managed by canonical which defeats the purpose. plus the snap daemon takes a shit ton of ram and bootup time :( (also all the big companies support snaps which makes it spookier) native apps will give best experience but flatpaks and stuff have their own uses too. tldr, i hate snaps, ubuntu forces you to use snaps, i hate ubuntu xD
Linuz Torvalds does not use Arch, because he wants to skip the distro part and get to the kernel easily. You use pure Arch if you value your RAM and disk space more than you value your own time.
You have tested the same version of Garuda that I have been using for the last five months. It is now my daily driver. I have come a Debian background too. My only issue is that I have to learn the new Arch command line package management. I have had trouble on Debian getting old packages to install. On Garuda my old packages just installed!
If Arch is what you want, but don't want to deal with the installation. Use EndeavourOS. It's basically a stock jnstall of arch with the Calamaris installer. Garuda is more of a fork with much pre installed software installed. Also, Don't rely on AUR. Its a fully user maintained package system and can destroy your system. Always read the make files to ensure the package is actually doing what you intend to do.
Nice video! I like the idea of reviewing linux distros. It would be nice if you could include screen recordings to actually see the distro without breaking the amazing structure you have for your videos! Thanks, Kalle! ✅
The problem with most lInux reviews is, that they do no test and check out the basics like printer setup, network share discovery, audio and bluetooth support etc. - i like it, if a desktop looks nice and if it is very responsive, but in the end the things I have mentioned are much, much more important for a productive OS. If they they do not work out of the box, it is often a pain to pick the right packages and it is very time consuming.
Actually I tried Garuda for 5 days and the reason of why I changed to Windows was I'm a C# developer but at the end, I love Linux and specially Garuda, I'm learning JavaScript to leave C# and then I'm free to go to every os I want
I'm so new to Linux and I wanted to know which Linux would be the best for beginners coming from Windows and is the transition hard ? loved the video as usual!!! cheers
When I started using Linux I also thought that windows is only for me but after using it for around 2 weeks I just fall in love with it ❤️❤️ Now I'm using Manjaro Linux 💕
Just go for Ubuntu or Linux mint first, when u feel more comfortable with Linux command line, and how Linux actually works u can go and try Arch Linux like (Manjaro), and then if u want to go more further, try to install Arch from the beginning and take a look at tilling window managers when ur main focus will be on keyboard,,, it takes so much time but trust it's worth it, I dual boot windows with Arch, I still use Windows for Adobe products and sometimes for playing games.
Garuda KDE Dr460nized is for high specs even the Garuda Xfce edition eating atleast 2GB of ram on standy only... If you have old hardware you need to install directly Arch Linux my old laptop eating only 800mb on KDE on standby.
When ppl say the Arch install is hard..... These guys never installed an Stage1 gentoo! There you compile every, yes every package self on the machine.
@@_MPP_ the original gentoo wiki back in stage1 days (don't know the Year's, it's a long time ago) the wiki doesn't tells you what to do on compiling errors in random packages.
I am annular to you. I live the idea of being the person that digs into things and understands the ins and the outs, but there is so much else to do and I cash get bored easily with roadblocks in the operating system to getting to actual work.
That one little thing about merging the mirror config after in update in Arch distros has a GUI in Garuda that makes it simple. You just have to look through the newbie menus to find it. I am liking Garuda.
Wine still a difficult thing to use, newbie don't know what DXVK/ESYNC/GLSL mean but as long as your game works...that's why Lutris and Proton are here. Im glad i don't need to write 30 line of commands to play minecraft
As a teen who installed arch linux, its really not that hard. It's only hard if you make it hard(like install a wm and configuring zsh and other non-essential stuff). Also considering the fact that you have a dell xps(which is a very supported pc) it wont take long. One more thing, gnome is the most easiest desktop environment to setup. It took me only about 1hr to install.
There are many different GNU... In garuda Like those who wanted pure but don't want to go through messy installation.. They have " Garuda linux barebone" Which is kindaa can be used for pure learning purposes...
A small fun fact: In Hinduism, Garuda is the divine half human-half bird and is the king of all birds and the mount of Lord Vishnu, one of the many gods in hindu religion. The Garud Special Force which is a SF unit of IAF, has Garuda as a martial motif as Garuda is a watchful protector who can swiftly go anywhere to fight his enemies. Proud of our own another Linux distribution and the developers!🇮🇳🇮🇳
Btw I use Arch. Garuda is bloated, but they preinstall just so much, arch isn't that hard, there are installer scripts like archfi, and if you don't like digging too much then just install pamac, it takes care of everything with no bloat on your system.
I agree. the main reason why I hate Garuda is... it doesn't feel like Arch. more like ubuntu with PacMan. used for a single day and switched back to arch. Also too many bloatware. Another thing... this depends on the hardware as well but... I didn't feel it as snappy as others say on my lap. Maybe because I'm used to XFCE.
Especially now, with the built-in installer. Garuda is quite cringe, imo, but that seems to be a theme for most Arch-based distros. Literally just get Arch lol
@@soda64 the built in installer isn't that good, use the archfi/archdi install scripts instead. Look it up on UA-cam or go to the github page for documentation.
Latte-dock never... Latte dock with dual monitors with 4 panels has a core dump and crashed. To this day, latte-dock has not corrected its errors/mistakes.
For Your Information, Name "Garuda" is a bird creature from Hindu mythology that has a mix of eagle and human features and was presented as enemies of snakes.
Been using Arch for 4 years and just don't agree that it's such a hassle. I dont consider myself a Linux expert or anything. Yeah, there's a bit more config/setup to do, but not really that much, especially if you keep your dotfiles. And of course you get the benefit of not having lot of bloat, having pacman and access to the AUR. I think the key to whether you like Arch or not is whether you think the bloat is bloat or convenience. Though after 4 years of usage, I'll say if you have a high-end computer, don't care about rolling releases for your OS and/or think bloat is convenience then I advice using something more mainstream like Windows or Ubuntu
Pro tip, running arch and Windows on the same disk, very bad bad idea. One windows update can completely break the bootloader, meaning you'll have to go on an live environment and rebuild your bootloader, which is harder than installing arch for any new users, if you want to dual-boot, do it in separate hardrives, then configure either grub or systemd boot to be able to launch windows as well as linux. Arch and Windows don't get a long nice when installed on the same hdd/ssd, by separating them, you are even able to hibernate windows, boot to linux and then reboot back to where you where in windows.
I've been a Debian user since its release in 1996. Before that I primarily used SunOS and a little Minix. So that's 25 years. This includes private use and work/enterprise/cloud (e.g., AWS). I've tried other primary distros and their down-branch forks many times but always came back to Debian distros. Unfortunately I feel like the quality of Ubuntu/LMDE5/etc. have gone down in quality and I've never been more ready to jump ship.. Garuda is the first distro that I've felt excited about after installing in possibly over a decade. It feels very stable & fast, while also feels like a good environment I can develop on. Its also made the transition away from APT to Pacman very comfortable, and it has neat little surprises here and there that delight. I still need to give it a good few months before I make a final call, but I've got a good feeling that Garuda will be my OS of choice for a long time to come. Hopefully I can get used to the rolling release model and not have my software development suffer. Thanks for the video, very much appreciated.
the easiest installation I have ever seen in Linux since 1999 was Slackware 9. The installer had easier options than all the modern installers of today. the only "difficult" thing about it is that it was an ncurses installer.
Arch based with the ease of Debian, Ubuntu & Mint, excellent for all users. Highly recommended, I person said good riddance to Windows thanks to Garuda Dra60nized Gaming edition.
I just realize I am a Linux, Windows, and Mac user all at the same time, my Gaming is Windows, my Development is Linux Arch, and my work office-related apps (provided by the company) are a Mac Book Pro. I like them all xD
I use a minimal install of Ubuntu on OpenZFS 2.0, so no bloatware and Firefox and a nice GUI are directly available. Since I moved all my "work" to VMs, I also installed Garuda on a VM. I like it, despite that it is based on KDE.
The issue I have with Garuda is the developers' philosophy on RAM usage. I understand their un-utilized RAM is wasted RAM point but I usually have arch-based systems running on older hardware. Seeing all 16GB of my RAM being taken for a couple of browser windows and terminals is overkill. It also made my machine incredibly unstable. This was actually my first Arch-based intro - I always seem to run into issues with Manjaro even when test driving it - and while I enjoyed its KDE-flavoured version (the Dragonized one is way too sparkly for my tastes) - I found it was way too bloated and laggy. The good thing about Garuda is that it really helps highlight the differences between a Debian based system like Ubuntu. In my experience, the best Arch-based distro is ArcoLinux, especially for older hardware. Put XFCE on top and my word it's beautiful.
This is a good assessment. In general, I liked Garuda, but I saw a couple of downsides. First, the commands used, since it is an Arch system, are not at all intuitive. On Fedora, Ubuntu, or Mint the command to update would be (for Fedora) dnf update, or for the Debians would be apt update. On Garuda it was pacman -Syu . Second, the "app store" GUI isn't that good. You can't use the ones from KDE or GNOME to install software, as it actively will tell you that it is recommended to only use those stores for things such as themes or backgrounds. Pamac or Bauh are not that great of GUIs. A major upside I saw was how fast and responsive it was, and that it could do updates or install some of the more common packages like Steam or LibreOffice with just a click. Even the bootloader could be customized with just a few clicks. It also uses the Zen Kernel, which from what I've seen, really does run a bit faster than the standard kernel.
What did you guys think of the ”utility boost” towards the end of the video? Yay or nay?
Also
if !subscribed:
print(”What are you even doing mate, subscribeee”)
subscribe()
else:
print(”Heyyo”)
Really like the idea man! Always looking for good new stuff and you're a great filter for those sorts of things
loving it
Heyyo
also the utility boost is an epic idea
You should checkout Archcraft. It's lightweight and looks pretty good too
* Climbs a tree *
" BTW I USE ARCH "
😂😂😂😂😂😂
this can actually happen in a few weeks!
This.
Someone please make a report. To Linus!
I would like to see it 😄😄😄
I did lol at this as well
I’m an arch purest BUT I love this distro it’s so simple and saves a TONE of time. If they keep The AUR, pamac, and other little utilities and cut out the extras, this will be the best distro. Manjaro is super bloated and sluggish. Garuda is just slightly too resource heavy. Or you can just start trimming the fat with sudo pacman -Rr until something breaks.
EDIT:
there is a barebones edition, pretty much the best distro I've tried in a while
Pamac is a waste of space. Another damn package manager that you DONT need, you can already do anything through the terminal
Checkout the latest Garuda
Nobody:
Literally nobody:
Kalle: climb a tree as a intro to the video
Stop that dumb shit.
@@kattihatt are you having a bad day or something? I don't think the commenter was trying to be rude. He's just using a template to make a funny comment
@@abidsyed1646 my eyes bleed when i read these template jokes.
@@kattihatt nobody cares if u hate these jokes. Nobody wants to know that u don't like them so don't comment them to stop
Because "Garuda" means "Eagle" in Hindi language (India). It's made in India.
Actually when you get used to Arch, especially the install process, it then becomes really easy. You can even install it without the guide.
wow installing an OS without the guide? Thats insane
yeah arch is easy to install now because of the cli installer in the april update
@@provsalt yeah but I personally don’t use it as it has some limitations like it only do GPT partitioning.
It's my primary os for coding
True
I haven't watched yet, but Garuda had been my daily driver for the past few months and I love it, going to start supporting it financially soon
yes you can just install the icons, it's a kde theme sweet-dark
**climbs the tree puts the camera**
**get's down**
**climbs again**
"fuck i forgot to press record"
* gets down again *
Lol true
I personally am an arch purist, I've been using pure arch for 3 years now, tried all kinds of distros but always came back to arch because all other distros did stuff that annoyed me a lot. I think I'm gonna give Garuda a shot now as it looks like a project that I personally thought about doing myself (making an out of the box usable arch installation).
maybe give artix a try if ur an arch purist
Bro I’m a 17 year old kid i wanna learn programming please help me out by recommending what should i learn first on linux as in language and what applications should i install to develop a program
Doing your own research is half of it but do something easy like Mint or Ubuntu, learn Vim, and learn C++
You can try Archlabs. It's been my daily driver for the last 3 years.
@@shaan9687 learn Python and start using emacs, I recommend Doom emacs
Been using garuda for a few months now. Don't think I'll ever change now
You're wrong about needing to install extra stuff on Arch whenever you install a package - you're using a package manager either way, which manages dependencies, so installing firefox on arch and ubuntu is pretty much the same.
Arch is better at finding dependencies automatically. It has all of them
Maybe he's never heard of pacman. Seriously, when I install new software on my Arch system, all I do is pacman -S and the system does the rest, installing dependencies, default config files, etc. I really don't understand what this guy is talking about.
@@vegn_brit5176 Garuda also comes with pamac-gui and yay it's just nonsense
Arch (via pacman/pamac) also handles dependencies, just like apt or yum do. Manjaro/Garuda are great for people who aren't experts in Linux. (Garuda also can be easily set up for backup imaging in case it breaks via Timeshift) The real big difference between the other Distros for Arch-based distros is that Arch (and Garuda and Manjaro) are rolling releases. These keep the packages very up to date, compared to others. It does have a chance to break your install, though. That doesn't happen often anymore, but it can.
Manjaro Linux is the standard Arch-Based distro for new users. I recommend giving that a look first, because it's such an established product as compared to Garuda which is very new, and has an uncertain future.
i tried garuda for 3 days. I crashed like 7 times while running a node js server and some tabs on brave + visual studio code.
its a distro only for looks, the performance and usage is very very bad
I used around 7/8 distros before I found manjaro. Now manjaro is my daily driver
I stopped distrohopping in 2017 all because of manjaro, i'm a fullstack web and it is just perfect for me. Everything i need is available through aur
I used Manjaro KDE as my daily driver for about 8 months on my laptop. It was pretty good but after a while I found it annoying that there were any good tiling managers for it. I wound up swapping to Pop OS and I might swap to Manjaro Gnome with pop tiling extension. That feels like it could be a good idea.
Absolutely
Running Manjaro only
No issues till date running over a month now 👍
Is no one gonna talk about the room reference 👀 "oh, hi mark"
Sugarhill? I mean... Zuckerberg? :-)
@@M0rn1n6St4r or me ;)?
@@markmadhukar9011 Of course. You were my next guess. Who are you? :-)
i did not hit her i did noot
@@M0rn1n6St4r Mark
9:57 this is not rly accurate, the default arch package manager 'pacman' works like any other package manager and installs all the dependencies the package needs. Same is the case with aur managers like 'yay'.
Here's my take on what Kalle is trying to say. For a specific package A, there might be at least 3 types of dependencies, (1) the required dependencies, (2) the recommended deps, and (3) the suggested deps.
On distros like Ubuntu, apt-get usually installs package A along with the above (1), (2), and (3) dependencies.
However, on Arch, pacman will only install the package A along with the type (1) dependencies only. The type (2) and (3) dependencies are called 'optional dependencies' or 'optdepends' in the Arch-way.
Please correct me wherever I was wrong. Hope this helps.
Have a great day everyone :)
he probably never finished a successful arch install
DNF is my Favorite Package Manager because it is Highly Configurable and Fast.
He probably didn't even use Garuda for the entire week. If he did, he would know that this part is not true.
@@shubhamnaik640 i agree
I have been using it for awhile now. Garuda is a great distro with many flavors. Highly recommended.
Are you still using it?
@@8rupees718 ye im using it from 6 months it's great for developing games
the biggest strength of arch is its documentation. everything else is secondary.
That's how it used to be, to run Arch was to be familiar with the Terminal, and wiki, not anymore, I've had Garuda for a few days, fully setup, and customized...without the Terminal, I only used that to download Blackarch's repository, other than that, I didn't type Sudo or Pacman 1 time.
@@KingMasadaX I use arch btw
@@KingMasadaX what linux distros are good for learning ?
@@rishirajsaikia1323 try Linux Mint, Pop OS, Zorin or Manjaro. They are easy to learn and use.
@@rishirajsaikia1323 just go with whatever distro you want.
I tried Garuda after I watched this video. I had mostly only used Windows before. It cost me a lot of time to configure everything to be what I like it to be(like themes, input method). But now it becomes my main system.
Should i get it
@@_quixote Maybe, it's highly out-of-box. Even you don't like it, you still learn that "Linux can do these" and modify it to what you like.
In my experience , the more bling and custom apps that come with a big distro, the greater the chances for problems over time - especially after a major Kde, Plasma, display manager, or package manager update.
He's got the best intro in UA-cam, the music the animation are just the way they should be.
Thanks For Trying Garuda Linux.
Feeling Proud That Indian OS Are Also Being Know❤
It's developer is Indian though@codenreload
i'm using this distro from 2 months and it's awesome feel like mac a little bit with power
If you don't like bloat, there's a bare-bones version for Garuda Linux, which just installs pure (means literally) Arch Linux(using calemeres) for you with
btrfs +
timeshift preconfigured +
software like ananicy & nohang +
ZRAM enabled by default
chaotic aur +
Garuda welcome utility
Instead of pure arch a comparison with manjaro would be more appropriate
i mean manjaro isnt really an arch based distro, i mean it uses pacman but the repositories are manjaro's not arch's like arco endevour etc which misses the whole point of an arch based distro
He had to climb the tree to place the camera to record himself climbing the tree 😳😱
I´m garuda user since march 2020. I just love it.
Are u still using it , if yes how is it working. Any issues u faced ?
I’m currently using EndeavourOS and it’s an arch based distro too…I love it!
Oh come on, Arch is not difficult to install, if it were looked at in a vacuum then sure, but there are a ton of guides where you if you don't know how to install, can just follow along and will have a working Arch system with KDE or Gnome or whichever DE (or WM, but that's not really for beginners) you choose.
That means, first time spending 30-60 minutes following a tutorial (30 because it's your first time+15 if you get stuck at some step for some reason + 15 if your internet is slow) and learning a ton while also having a working arch system
Second time you install arch, any guide will be just a reminder for stuff and you can do it in 20-40 minutes.
After that the installation really is fast, if you exclude installation of desktop environment (which is literally one command, but takes time because of downloading and installing a lot of packages) then you can easily install arch in under 10 minutes, did it multiple times on many machines.
Yes but you never know about all the options available when following a tutorial or anything.
@@aniketraj4823 yes, but almost everyone who installs arch, first time they use the tutorial. It's not meant to first time give you info about options, first time you learn what is actually happening in instalation instead of following GUI, you learn about bootloaders(which means you'll later know that you can choose either one you want), you learn a bit more about usergroups and sudo(which means you'll later know there are also doas and similar alternatives), you learn about partitioning(which will help you later understand about LVM which you might choose on next installation) etc...
It's just important to first time follow some generic tutorial, not some special that will immediatelly force those stuff, like different bootloader or LVM or whatever as that way you might not learn about how many things function.
First time I also followed a tutorial, it helped me understand how the installation process for a distro worrks.
Exactly
So usually the issue is not following the guide itself. Just because it worked the first time for you on your system, it doesn't mean that it will work for everyone. Over the years I have installed Arch on several different machines and many are not really friendly to arch Linux installation process.
Sometimes, especially on laptops, the installation process throws up some random error on some step. For example, on my laptop the arch-chroot command does not work for some weird reason and I have to manually rbind and make-rslave on the sys folder to chroot into my install, steps which I actually know from installing Gentoo. There is no way a newbie will be able to figure stuff like that by simply watching some guide. They will have to dive deep into the arch wiki and the less knowledgeable you are about linux, the more time this will take.
@@aniketraj4823 whatever but installing arch needs no tutorial that's why wiki exists.
If you can read you can install arch it's that easy :)
Honestly, I am really impressed by Garuda with i3wm version.
A simple Intro :- NOPE
Climbing a tree for the Intro :- Bitch I'm in
After watching this video, I got curious with Garuda and jump ship to try my first arch-based linux. During work, I give time to setup up our web app here on Garuda. Took me a while to run our company web app system built on kinda oldish stack, AngularJs and Laravel. The spending of hours is real. I dont mind it, coz my thirst to know more about this system weighs more. And the last thing is its worth trying Garuda so thanks for this video
Garuda is a good and simple way for people to try out arch in a different and more simplicities way. It’s also a good stepping stone to one day taking the plunge on other arch variants despite what elitists and would-be purists might say. As someone who has been working with multiple distros of Linux since the 90s I found Garuda to be an easier and clean starter arch distro.
Thanks for the shoutout Kalle. Fantastic video as always🙏
I guess that Manjaro KDE is the balance when you're looking for an Arch based non bloated distro after trying out Garuda for a while.
Manjaro? Not bloated?
There's manjaro minimal iso version too which has less bloat and you can make it no bloat very easily ,
Garuda also has bare bones edition which like manjaro minimal or endeavour os has very minimal bloat which is actually useful for a new user.
@@papiyabasu1564 absolutely, they all offer easy installation process. Plus Manjaro also offers stability as it's not bleeding edge but takes times before pushing updates.
I have been following you for 2 years now and i have been a linux user for 4 years or so, so i know part of your linux journey , and I am glad the way you have informed yourself about distrros and DEs and also convey via your channel
Commemdable 👏👏👏
It's the best, I'm using it on daily basis. Especially it's made in our country, I'm very much proud of it!
Garuda made in india??
@@greenbillugaming2781 yes
It is made in India with lead developer living in Kolhapur Maharashtra named Shrinivas Kumbhar.
How is gaming performance? wine and dxvk? in Garuda Gaming Dragonized Edition?
I really like the GUI 😍❣️
I had more issues installing packages on Debian and Fedora than Arch.
I would disagree with the point of “Debian or Fedora install extra stuff with the package you want but Arch don’t”. For example in ubuntu there is a gcc package and a g++ package. Whereas in Arch g++ is a part of gcc. Also in Ubuntu there is separate packages for users and devs, so there is a package for pulseaudio and pulseaudio-dev. Whereas in Arch there is one pulse audio package and that package includes everything even the dev stuff (headers and libraries). So i would disagree as it is literally the other way around.
plus he is on garuda, thats like the bloatiest shit in last 3 years xD
@@terahawk yeah, i HATE BLOATWARE. Like literally, Gnome on Arch uses half the Ram it uses on Ubuntu, at least in my experience.
@@karimfadi blame the snaps oof
can install ubuntu the arch way too, super minimal, but the snaps are a deal breaker
@@terahawk do you really use snaps?!? Like i hate them, nothing is better than the distro’s package manager IMHO.
@@karimfadi flatpaks and snaps are the only thing you should (if you dont wanna mess with firejail) use to download proprietary software like discord , chrome, zoom, teams, etc, because they are containerised, the apps can not tell anything about your system, so more secure.
flatpaks are alright, opensource, good packagers, only downside being their runtimes are frigging huge i.e. can end up 2-3gb of runtime after 3-4 apps, but the thing with snaps is their core is closed source and managed by canonical which defeats the purpose. plus the snap daemon takes a shit ton of ram and bootup time :(
(also all the big companies support snaps which makes it spookier)
native apps will give best experience but flatpaks and stuff have their own uses too.
tldr, i hate snaps, ubuntu forces you to use snaps, i hate ubuntu xD
Thanks for this. After watching the vid, spun it up in a VM and used it for a few days. Ended up replacing Ubuntu with it and loving it.
Any issue so far?
Kalle please make video on how to stay fit and healthy as a programmer
do sports and cook by yourself
@@NinetyOnePercent go gym and eat your vegetables :D
stop eating cheeseburgers and cake
Climb trees
smoke centipedes
I came from Linux Tex review of Garuda to your channel. Thank you for the honest review. Time for me to finally try out Garuda!
another Kalle linux videos Love em
Kalle Linux
Kali Linux
Kali Lincox
hackerman confirmed
Linuz Torvalds does not use Arch, because he wants to skip the distro part and get to the kernel easily. You use pure Arch if you value your RAM and disk space more than you value your own time.
You have tested the same version of Garuda that I have been using for the last five months. It is now my daily driver. I have come a Debian background too. My only issue is that I have to learn the new Arch command line package management. I have had trouble on Debian getting old packages to install. On Garuda my old packages just installed!
If Arch is what you want, but don't want to deal with the installation.
Use EndeavourOS. It's basically a stock jnstall of arch with the Calamaris installer.
Garuda is more of a fork with much pre installed software installed.
Also, Don't rely on AUR. Its a fully user maintained package system and can destroy your system. Always read the make files to ensure the package is actually doing what you intend to do.
8:25 I usually just remove some preinstalled software and install this one that I like.
The Garuda color scheme is really awesome!
Nice video! I like the idea of reviewing linux distros. It would be nice if you could include screen recordings to actually see the distro without breaking the amazing structure you have for your videos! Thanks, Kalle! ✅
I agree with this comment. It was the only thing that kinda went missing for me in this video. Otherwise great video, thoughts and review
The problem with most lInux reviews is, that they do no test and check out the basics like printer setup, network share discovery, audio and bluetooth support etc. - i like it, if a desktop looks nice and if it is very responsive, but in the end the things I have mentioned are much, much more important for a productive OS. If they they do not work out of the box, it is often a pain to pick the right packages and it is very time consuming.
Actually I tried Garuda for 5 days and the reason of why I changed to Windows was I'm a C# developer but at the end, I love Linux and specially Garuda, I'm learning JavaScript to leave C# and then I'm free to go to every os I want
.NET Core is a thing tho, and there are things like Avalonia
Great review.
Sent from the Linux and KDE Plasma 5 desktop computer at my desk
I'm so new to Linux and I wanted to know which Linux would be the best for beginners coming from Windows and is the transition hard ?
loved the video as usual!!!
cheers
Try zorion / mint
Ubuntu / kubuntu
KDE Neon
When I started using Linux I also thought that windows is only for me but after using it for around 2 weeks I just fall in love with it ❤️❤️
Now I'm using Manjaro Linux 💕
Just go for Ubuntu or Linux mint first, when u feel more comfortable with Linux command line, and how Linux actually works u can go and try Arch Linux like (Manjaro), and then if u want to go more further, try to install Arch from the beginning and take a look at tilling window managers when ur main focus will be on keyboard,,, it takes so much time but trust it's worth it, I dual boot windows with Arch, I still use Windows for Adobe products and sometimes for playing games.
Kalle should continue his fitness channel because of all his viewers being so unfit from sitting in front of a computer all day.
To be honest, yes Arch-based distros are smooth and fast... but almost every non-Arch-based distro is too.
I love utility boost, it’s awesome how you give credit where credit is due to other UA-camrs. Much love man ❤️
I have been using it for gaming and Vanilla Arch for software development
ua-cam.com/video/6LBQ_Ukv2CI/v-deo.html 🥰
The moment you realized he had to climb the tree twice to get the intro..thumbs up for that
I don't know why kalle but the video feels like a fitness video at first
Garuda KDE Dr460nized is for high specs even the Garuda Xfce edition eating atleast 2GB of ram on standy only... If you have old hardware you need to install directly Arch Linux my old laptop eating only 800mb on KDE on standby.
When ppl say the Arch install is hard..... These guys never installed an Stage1 gentoo! There you compile every, yes every package self on the machine.
I don't recommend installing Novell Netware then... lol.
The horror..... The horror...
Gentoo is as "hard" as Arch for example. If you can read the wiki, you can install it.
@@_MPP_ the original gentoo wiki back in stage1 days (don't know the Year's, it's a long time ago) the wiki doesn't tells you what to do on compiling errors in random packages.
I am annular to you. I live the idea of being the person that digs into things and understands the ins and the outs, but there is so much else to do and I cash get bored easily with roadblocks in the operating system to getting to actual work.
That one little thing about merging the mirror config after in update in Arch distros has a GUI in Garuda that makes it simple. You just have to look through the newbie menus to find it.
I am liking Garuda.
It's gaming edition comes with wine and all pre installed
So overall it's arch for newbibes
Wine still a difficult thing to use, newbie don't know what DXVK/ESYNC/GLSL mean but as long as your game works...that's why Lutris and Proton are here.
Im glad i don't need to write 30 line of commands to play minecraft
I switched to it from manjaro and haven't really looked back
I seriously love this distro because it's too fast and snappy
Can you please try Manjaro?
It's like Garuda a arch based OS.
The OG easy arch installer
Garuda is not directly based on arch. Garuda is a fork of Manjaro which is further based on arch.
@@rishabhsharma2188 interesting
As a teen who installed arch linux, its really not that hard. It's only hard if you make it hard(like install a wm and configuring zsh and other non-essential stuff). Also considering the fact that you have a dell xps(which is a very supported pc) it wont take long.
One more thing, gnome is the most easiest desktop environment to setup. It took me only about 1hr to install.
I’m 14 and I installed arch and gentoo. EZ.
@@emeraldmasta7752 I'm your age too! though I gave up on gentoo after a long time waiting for stuff to compile.
@@vicfic_ Yeah, that’s the one bad thing about gentoo, compile times.
Arch linux is super easy and it never get old !!
There are many different GNU... In garuda Like those who wanted pure but don't want to go through messy installation..
They have
" Garuda linux barebone"
Which is kindaa can be used for pure learning purposes...
I use Debian like arch. I uncheck all the things at the installation and I install everything myself.
Get ready for gentoo
@@firesnake6311 i do not like gentoo
A small fun fact:
In Hinduism, Garuda is the divine half human-half bird and is the king of all birds and the mount of Lord Vishnu, one of the many gods in hindu religion. The Garud Special Force which is a SF unit of IAF, has Garuda as a martial motif as Garuda is a watchful protector who can swiftly go anywhere to fight his enemies.
Proud of our own another Linux distribution and the developers!🇮🇳🇮🇳
Since you are getting into Linux, you should learn more about user privacy, since you now have more control over it.
If you liked Garuda. Try out Endeavour OS next. It's a very clean install.
Ew no, it looks like shit
Ngl Garuda os is actually pretty dope . Love the os and your vid thanks kalle
❤️
i use Garuda as my main os and it perform really well in games and everyday usage while looking amazing.
Plot twist: 0:00 he did it twice first time for the camera setup second time for the intro
Btw I use Arch. Garuda is bloated, but they preinstall just so much, arch isn't that hard, there are installer scripts like archfi, and if you don't like digging too much then just install pamac, it takes care of everything with no bloat on your system.
Why you are showing your face instead of the display.
My question is why are you showing your face on your pfp instead of an icon?
@@PhoenixWolfStudiosGood one! I was gonna roast him but you got him😂
Why are you Indian
I agree. the main reason why I hate Garuda is... it doesn't feel like Arch. more like ubuntu with PacMan. used for a single day and switched back to arch. Also too many bloatware.
Another thing... this depends on the hardware as well but... I didn't feel it as snappy as others say on my lap. Maybe because I'm used to XFCE.
never been this early before
You ok there buddy?
I love the utility boost! Great concept and very helpful
Arch isn’t that hard to install.
Especially now, with the built-in installer. Garuda is quite cringe, imo, but that seems to be a theme for most Arch-based distros. Literally just get Arch lol
@@Diogo-fk3xn true...
@Pissed Off White Guy True.
@@Diogo-fk3xn could you tell me more about that buildin iNstaller? Name, website or manual for it? I want to learn more
@@soda64 the built in installer isn't that good, use the archfi/archdi install scripts instead. Look it up on UA-cam or go to the github page for documentation.
Latte-dock never...
Latte dock with dual monitors with 4 panels has a core dump and crashed. To this day, latte-dock has not corrected its errors/mistakes.
For Your Information, Name "Garuda" is a bird creature from Hindu mythology that has a mix of eagle and human features and was presented as enemies of snakes.
cool stuff! thanks for letting us know!
@ Your Welcome! :D
Been using Arch for 4 years and just don't agree that it's such a hassle. I dont consider myself a Linux expert or anything. Yeah, there's a bit more config/setup to do, but not really that much, especially if you keep your dotfiles. And of course you get the benefit of not having lot of bloat, having pacman and access to the AUR. I think the key to whether you like Arch or not is whether you think the bloat is bloat or convenience. Though after 4 years of usage, I'll say if you have a high-end computer, don't care about rolling releases for your OS and/or think bloat is convenience then I advice using something more mainstream like Windows or Ubuntu
I Just Loved the Intro❤
3:46 the meme is not
"I use linux btw"
..but...
"I use Arch btw"
Garuda linux🖤
Pro tip, running arch and Windows on the same disk, very bad bad idea. One windows update can completely break the bootloader, meaning you'll have to go on an live environment and rebuild your bootloader, which is harder than installing arch for any new users, if you want to dual-boot, do it in separate hardrives, then configure either grub or systemd boot to be able to launch windows as well as linux.
Arch and Windows don't get a long nice when installed on the same hdd/ssd, by separating them, you are even able to hibernate windows, boot to linux and then reboot back to where you where in windows.
Linux = garuda
Java = jakarta
I love my place indonesia but java and linux using identity indonesia :)
Garuda is Sanskrit word.
@@Ishant007 forgive his ignorance
I've been a Debian user since its release in 1996. Before that I primarily used SunOS and a little Minix. So that's 25 years. This includes private use and work/enterprise/cloud (e.g., AWS). I've tried other primary distros and their down-branch forks many times but always came back to Debian distros. Unfortunately I feel like the quality of Ubuntu/LMDE5/etc. have gone down in quality and I've never been more ready to jump ship.. Garuda is the first distro that I've felt excited about after installing in possibly over a decade. It feels very stable & fast, while also feels like a good environment I can develop on. Its also made the transition away from APT to Pacman very comfortable, and it has neat little surprises here and there that delight. I still need to give it a good few months before I make a final call, but I've got a good feeling that Garuda will be my OS of choice for a long time to come. Hopefully I can get used to the rolling release model and not have my software development suffer. Thanks for the video, very much appreciated.
this guy: imma install an arch based distro.
also this guy: i hope it has access to the aur.
yes
the easiest installation I have ever seen in Linux since 1999 was Slackware 9. The installer had easier options than all the modern installers of today.
the only "difficult" thing about it is that it was an ncurses installer.
Arch based with the ease of Debian, Ubuntu & Mint, excellent for all users. Highly recommended, I person said good riddance to Windows thanks to Garuda Dra60nized Gaming edition.
Does wine and dxvk comes preinstalled? coz I just can't get them working on Mint, PopOS for some reasons. hate that terminal.
I just realize I am a Linux, Windows, and Mac user all at the same time, my Gaming is Windows, my Development is Linux Arch, and my work office-related apps (provided by the company) are a Mac Book Pro. I like them all xD
Man! exactly same here..
Welcome to the Arch community :)
I use a minimal install of Ubuntu on OpenZFS 2.0, so no bloatware and Firefox and a nice GUI are directly available.
Since I moved all my "work" to VMs, I also installed Garuda on a VM. I like it, despite that it is based on KDE.
06:09 yeah, that looks comfortable to me
That posture is called the *PROGRAMMING FROG*
that posture is an equivalent of the matrix style falling random green letters on hackers' computers when you watch hollywood movies
The issue I have with Garuda is the developers' philosophy on RAM usage. I understand their un-utilized RAM is wasted RAM point but I usually have arch-based systems running on older hardware. Seeing all 16GB of my RAM being taken for a couple of browser windows and terminals is overkill. It also made my machine incredibly unstable.
This was actually my first Arch-based intro - I always seem to run into issues with Manjaro even when test driving it - and while I enjoyed its KDE-flavoured version (the Dragonized one is way too sparkly for my tastes) - I found it was way too bloated and laggy. The good thing about Garuda is that it really helps highlight the differences between a Debian based system like Ubuntu.
In my experience, the best Arch-based distro is ArcoLinux, especially for older hardware. Put XFCE on top and my word it's beautiful.
It took 16 GB of your RAM? I heard that it only takes about 2 GB more than any other arch distro!
Sir try deepin OS 😍 it's one of the best beautiful OS
inconsistent at times honestly
deepin apps are beautiful though
This is a good assessment.
In general, I liked Garuda, but I saw a couple of downsides.
First, the commands used, since it is an Arch system, are not at all intuitive. On Fedora, Ubuntu, or Mint the command to update would be (for Fedora) dnf update, or for the Debians would be apt update. On Garuda it was pacman -Syu .
Second, the "app store" GUI isn't that good. You can't use the ones from KDE or GNOME to install software, as it actively will tell you that it is recommended to only use those stores for things such as themes or backgrounds. Pamac or Bauh are not that great of GUIs.
A major upside I saw was how fast and responsive it was, and that it could do updates or install some of the more common packages like Steam or LibreOffice with just a click. Even the bootloader could be customized with just a few clicks.
It also uses the Zen Kernel, which from what I've seen, really does run a bit faster than the standard kernel.