Debian vs Arch. Which Is The Best Distro?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 3 ต.ค. 2024
- Debian and Arch. Two of the most popular Linux distributions. Which is the better distro?
REFERENCED:
► www.debian.org/
► www.archlinux....
WANT TO SUPPORT THE CHANNEL?
💰 Patreon: / distrotube
💳 Paypal: www.paypal.com...
🛍️ Amazon: amzn.to/2RotFFi
👕 Teespring: teespring.com/...
SOCIAL PLATFORMS:
🗨️ Mastodon: mastodon.techn...
💬 IRC: irc://freenode #distrotube
👫 Reddit: / distrotube
DT ON THE WEB:
🕸️ Website: distrotube.com/
🌐 Gopherhole: gopher://distro.tube
📁 GitLab: gitlab.com/dwt1
Your support is very much appreciated. Thanks, guys! - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
Linux changed my life. Arch changed my linux.
>!>*!«
Give a beer to this gentleman.
+1 for covering everything but in my case i have an additional one:
DistroTube changed my Desktop Environment to a Tiling Window Manager
Perfectly put.
I know but living in africa with bad internet makes it hard to run arch based systems
I loved this video, and I love both Distros. Btw, I use Debian!
Yup there's plenty of love to go around for both distros.
@UCI8Jcd63BVZZJicQ_q60w5g it's too hard to brick pc, almost unreal
@Вероника Заглотова и почему же на английском, если у меня явно славянское имя?
Для обычного пользователя, если ОС телефона сломана, то самостоятельно починить почти невозможно.
С компьютером же всё куда проще, да и данные можно в облаке сохранить
Chris Titus Tech wow, I didn’t know you can use “btw” with other distros.
Me2
Very nice background music. And not too loud. 👍
Sounds like at any moment he'll say "for just 25 cents a day, you can feed a Linux distro."
Zellonous 😂 😂
The music reminds me of the Miiverse OST
Typical Arch user @ freenode:
"Arch is the best, pro distro, l33t"
Same user 5 minutes later:
"Why my keyboard doesn't work?"
@Terrific Tape by using a windows 10 computer.
@@jd-foo lol..actually funny..haha
4 days later why my whole PC is broken
Both are great, for me arch is more minimalist and cutting edge, debian is rock solid. I prefer arch for desktop or laptop, maybe debian for servers
Huh.. I love arch and arch based stuff. But for a box I want to just use with no tinkering it's Debian all the way. Seems like Solus deservers an honorable mention, though
@@andrewfournier8817 Solus is Linux for people who just want to enjoy life.
guess you havent run Antix yet
I use Arch on my desktop and server. Server has never crashed.
I am busted up over which has the better logo.
Good video.
Thanks for not put one over the other.
Fair comparison and to the point, and you gave us your very final thought at the end.
Making an entire video for the meme. Well played Sir, Well played..
(btw i use arch with i3wm)
Im using it with Gnome, i dont know why, but i like Gnome (but i liked win8 too, so i might have a taste whats not too common.. XD ).
Helyes
Cool
"I have done configuring the config file, now I can upload my anime rice to r/unixporn. *gets error* BLYAAAAAAAAAAAAT"
Its great to try new distrabutions out every once in a while. I did in my early linux days 97-2003. Then you realize they all the same. But when you run mission critical no time for down time. You have to use something tried and tested something you can trust. Now if you using your workstation for business can you afford to be down or playing with with the latest greatest software... no. Personal machine play all you want and arch can give you that. But when there is work to be done grab the tried and tested tools everyone knows works no time for games.
I did a fresh install of Debian stable last in 2015 and just upgraded each time there was a new major realise not even 15min down time. My workstation and work flow are every important to me and keeps me productive. If arch brings more people to the freedom of open source great. Play with everything find what works for you dont get too distracted that this distro dose this and that distro dose that. They can all do the same things.
It's indeed that, but personally I've never seen arch breaking on my machine. My poor configs and lack of understanding at first made it not work well, but it operates pretty nicely
@@XDjUanZInHO Good for you
Great video. Let's see. I've got Fedora on my main workstation, debian on my laptop. And I use arch for most of my VMs to keep them light.
Debian supports a large number of architectures, I like that it still supports 32 bits. Debian can be Rock solid if you want, and bleeding edge up to date, if you want it. Thanks for the video!
All that to get to "btw, i use arch". hahaha!
The logo debate was discussed. More important than people realize.
The Arch logo could be a steaming pile of s#!t and I would still use it, it would be like determining what type of car to buy based off of what type of coffee is at the dealership.
@@kenzer1614 No, it would be like determining what type of car to buy based off its logo.
Love the encouraging and soft tone background music lol
Between these two, there's no _The Best_
Everyone has their own personal preferences & different requirements
@Agnish Roy Yeah ! Thats why universities all over the world run it !
@@dougtilaran3496 Fun fact: the ISS runs Debian, modern day universities run some Linux distro as well, and almost everyone knows about Linux (Although many are afraid to switch)
Fedora is like the best of both worlds: up-to-date software, but a strong stance on freedom software with explicit opt-in for proprietary software, and corporate backing of RedHat
Fedora is really nice, honestly.
fedora eats lots of ram and it is slow as per my experience
@@Leha__777 It hasn't been that way for me. Though maybe that is because I was testing out the XFCE version
@@mr_beezlebub3985 yep probably because i was using gnome edition
@@Leha__777 Yeah, Gnome chews through ram like Windows does... At least Gnome looks better and performs better.
Do an arch vs gentoo sometime XD
I liked the idea of Gentoo but I eventually gave up because I kept getting compile errors.
@@kdemetter I spent (and you won't believe it) 90 hours installing Gentoo. It's not a good idea to install Gentoo on a 2008 desktop with an AMD dual core and 2 GBs of RAM. Those were 90 hours between the first power on and the last reboot, I quit Gentoo (on that PC) after hours and hours of waiting compilations. I never got errors, just a stupid amount of time wasted.
@@Mingura666well daamn 😂
I wouldn't install Gentoo because:
1. I'm not skilled enough to use it.
2. My CPU isn't good for compiling.
Tried both Gentoo and arch, loved gentoo over arch, but my pc is slow for compiling, now am using endeavour os (arch-based but without the hassle and is very close to vanilla unlike manjaro)
Edit: arch-based
always debian or debian stable based distros are recommended for daily productional works.
Nice DT .. like the background music
Interesting title, it looks like 'linux vs linux '
edit: nvm he made a good point about that. btw i use solus :)
... and it is.
i use arch btw
Alexander White I use arch, debian, red ribbon, macos, ios, illumos, amiga os, and others
I've tried solus. It broke and became unbootable within five minutes after updating.
John Guillera i have no issues on first install :)
I followed an excellent Arch installation video Derek made a while back, he led us through the Arch wiki on the video. There was a slight problem with one command so innocently asked on the forum. The fact that the wiki was followed in the video was not relevant, I made the mistake of mentioning the video. I did not get any welcome to the forum, I got criticised for posting the query being told that I had to contact Derek for help despite the fact the wiki was followed.
I've participated in numerous forums, find Ubuntu and Raspberrypi the best and friendliest. Some participants just like to shout and sound important, easy answer, if they don't like the question then don't answer. Can you imagine being at a bar and asking a mate something about car mechanics and he replies have you read the F***ing manual 😎
I'd recommend EndeavourOS if you want an Arch-based system with a friendly community and sane defaults. Also includes the Calamares installer and nicely themed XFCE out of the box.
I haven't understood why do they even get in the trouble answering if all they ave to say is to check the Arch Wiki.
I have nothing to post here, btw I use Arch.
Me neither, BTW I use Manjaro.
Me trither, btw I use Windows XP
lmao
I use Manjaro XP
@@pressfinchat The madman
When I was young and inexperienced I used Ubuntu and then Debian (stable) on my desktop machine, now I use Arch because it is rolling release and is easier to maintain...
"Are you archsperienced? Have you ever been archsperienced? Well, I have!"
Excellent , just an excellent piece , I guess that's what a Linux commercial would look like if we had them on TV. Imagine Linux advertising to the masses , Pushing their distro , trying to be nice, subliminal vague bias ... Excellent
tldr; Arch for updates and customization. Debian for stability.
I use Arch at home and Debian at work. In my opinion, Arch should be picked by those people who want some heavy customization and are willing to do so by themselves. Whoever wants the latest software available at doorstep all the time, should use Arch.
On the other hand, those who intend to do little configuration, want a very stable and solid system, do not typically need cutting edge software readily available at the official repo all the time, should go for Debian stable. Debian is so reliable and Arch is so fresh.
Tbh, after you set everything up the way you want in Arch, you can continue that setup without doing any tweak or experiencing any issue for months, or even years. It is not like there is sth that is pushing you to update, install more stuff etc. so Arch can be pretty reliable as well.
Used both. Love both! Sticked with Debian but if no Debian, I would definitely use Arch. Great video.
If there was no Debian...i'd get a Mac...
Im not a advanced user at all but i find arch to be my choise of distro, ive gotten the RTFM a couple of times on the forum but as i explained i was a brand new linux user they started pointing me in the right direction.
RTFM just means the wiki has a better explanation than what others are likely to give. The best course of action is often to say RTFM and point to the appropriate wiki page.
@@kenzer1614 yeah some just say RTFM but some are actually nice and show you where to read.
As a debian user, I admire Arch and Debian sid users for contributing to the community by filing bug reports of the cutting edge s/w.
Nice video, as usual :)
My Linux journey started with Debian back in 2001 and since then I also tried Arch but I always come back to Debian based Distro.
Currently my main distro is Kali because, you know, it is Debian based, and is a rolling release distro like Arch.
I just installed Siduction and will see if it can become my new favorite.
1 command for free WiFi passwords makes Kali the best distro. 🤫
Debian or Arch?
yes
LOLOL!!! That was great!!
your comment be like:
*return (debian || arch);*
I was expecting a "The more you know!" closing clip at the end, lol!
Desktop / Laptop:
Debian Testing
Server / Workstation:
Debian Stable
Using Debian Sid since 2011 but I always was attracted by Arch. Finally I tried Arch some months ago and I made the switch on the desktop, mainly because I got new hardware that needed the latest kernel, firmware and drivers, and Debian was in the freeze stage.
One of the things I don't like in Arch is that packages aren't finely divided like in Debian. For example, if I only need the firmware package for my AMD videocard, in Debian I can install only the package with that firmware, it's 32 MB installed. In Arch it exists only one package with all the firmwares for every device, and it's something like 500 MB if I remember correctly. And many other packages in Arch works this way, it's simpler but it takes a lot of disk space for nothing (and with SSDs limited space and expensive cost, it's no good).
Good job, again!
The video actually makes it look like debian is better than Arch.
Arch, much like the linux CLI is for people that actually know what they're doing. Debian is for people that just want something that works. Arch is for people that think something "just working" is boring.
Did u watched the whole video ? He uses arch dipshit
@Gabriele Nocentini Congrats, you just missed the point I made. CLI's are for people that know what they're doing. GUI's are for people that don't - and who, usually, don't want to know either.
If you know the linux/unix file system, if you know the gnu/linux posix compliant CLI commands, if you know exactly what you want out of your machine and how to make it do that then CLI is for you.
If, on the other hand you want to browse the web, play a game or two, do your taxes, maybe use a spreadsheet program or two while you listen to music, in other words if you just want your system to work, and you DON'T want to learn how it works then GUI is for you. I know, I know, but you can learn how to launch those programs from the CLI. But again, you'd be missing the point.
The whole world moved away from CLI for personal computing because we are a lazy and visually orientated species. Our visual cortex is literally the largest single part of our brain. Most people don't want to be sysadmins, most people don't want to know how their system works. They just want it to work. Being able to install a DE or a standalone WM via CLI means nothing to people that don't want to learn to use CLI in the first place.
Arch is more modular, but modularity doesn't matter to 99.9% of the world. Arch does offer a stock experience, a stock GNU/Linux CLI experience, that nobody but a few linux fanatics care about. Debian, like mint, like PoP OS, like Solus, like -dare I say it?- Ubuntu offer a customized experience designed to make your life easier and make sure your newly installed system just works. They are less modular for the same reason the only successful linux distro on the planet isn't modular and is more then closed off to it's users - that's what people actually need. Android isn't successful because we want it to be successful, it isn't successful because Linux is great, it's successful because it both just works and because it doesn't give it's users anywhere near enough rope for them to proverbially hang themselves. Hell, Android is successful for the same reason people would rather install htop then spend the time to learn how to set up top to make it a bit more usable. ( www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/8yx165/htop_vs_top/ )
People have been, are and will continue to be lazy. If you're hobby is to tinker with software, then arch and gentoo are for you. If you are also a computer enthusiast that has a good PC then linux from scratch might be right up your alley. But for the rest of the planet, for the people that still use Windows, Mac, as well as iOS and Android, for the people that use their computer either for work or for other hobbies like gaming, listening to music, media PC's etc., etc. For those people Debian is a far, far better option then Arch will ever be.
And before you reply, ask yourself just this one question: how many Windows office users that spend their days in the latest version of M$ Excel, or Adobe Photoshop, or AudoDesk's Autocad do you think actually know how Windows itself operate?
" arch is surely more modular and offers a stock experience, on the other and Debian has more customized packages, " people don't want stock GNU/Linux any more then they wanted stock DOS 40 or so years ago when the Apple Lisa launched. Linux enthusiasts that know how linux works want stock linux, the rest want Android on a desktop, or as close to that as possible.
@@AlucardNoir Wow..just wow. Great comment. You explained it very well. Today's world is complex. There are a lot of things to manage. Work, hobbies, taxes, broken car/some other utility. Then there is social life. Most people don't have the time (and energy!) to figure out or want to figure out the under-the-hood stuff of Linux. It's only the hardcore, professional, and many a times keen hobbyists that want to really use CLI. And as much as elitist with their proud noses high in the air may want to scoff at out of the box customized Linux and feel superior while doing so, it's a wonderful thing. Especially for progressing the open source movement.
I like Debian. But thinking about making my gaming rig Arch and keeping my laptop Debian Testing.
4:44
The bottom of the Arch logo looks exactly like the head and shoulders of that guy.
Can't unsee.
Probably why luke chose this logo for larbs.xyz
The soothing background music is a hoot, Derek. Good summaries on Debian and Arch, too. Yesterday I updated my Debian stable installation to Buster, without a hitch. I live in Fedora these days, but I keep Debian as a backup. I'm getting a refurb Dell E7440 Ultrabook off eBay later this week and I need to decide what distro to put on it. Maybe ArcoLinux with herbstluftwm or qtile on top of good 'ol xfce.
Debian and the history make part of my soul and pasion for tecnology. Thanks for your channel DistroTube, nice content and narrative. Greeting comunity.
btw both have the best icons...
4:38 I didn't suppose that he would said it
I hadn't seen a video like this on your channel. I like it.It's a bit neutral and complete at the same time. Good vid!
Honestly I've grown more and more to love the straight stability of Debian.
While I do miss the updates of arch I think I manage just fine.
Oh dude i study english by your videoes)) nice diction and nice material)
и я
Awesome vid! Keep up the good work
The Arch wiki has always solved any issue I've had with Arch. I have never had to post on any Arch forum.
If I had to use 1 distro _only_ it would have to be debian (testing)
Yes! More comparison videos please.
Damn!! I've been single booting Linux for 4 years (Manjaro Xfce) and I still learn from the simplest of your videos! You've got a new subscriber, Sir.
I don't understand how one can be 4 years on xcfe.
@@tiagopaim3060 If I could share screenshots, you would.
@@tiagopaim3060 My Linux is bad to the bone.
@@tiagopaim3060 and so is my phone, thanks to my Linux compiling my Android OSes.
@@tiagopaim3060 Xfce is boss.
around 1:30...Skateboarders should use debian unstable ....I guess because they are radical :)
I like debain because apt is dead simple to use, and sources.list is so easily configurable by hand.
Debian for work serious. Arch for home, hobbying, experimental testing, or if you just want to understand Linux on a deeper level.
I mean sure you can use Arch as a workstation but going on stable branch Debian makes me feel easier at heart
I've found that Arch is incredibly stable - I've had only around 3 times where I needed to systems.unit=rescue.target to fix issues (usually Nvidia proprietary drivers) and they took me only a few minutes to sort out. Other than that, everything is super stable, and I use it on multiple machines
I use Manjaro Deepin (which is based on Arch) and it runs like a champ. Manjaro has other flavors too which makes it highly configurable and customizable too!
Arch without even a question. Even Solus is better. The reason people say Debian is stable is because 90% of the software available, including the kernel is 1 year behind. My server has been running Arch for almost a year and has never had a software or failure due to Arch or even any problems at all.
Thank you, Derek. I love apt.
Ofc Gentoo 😍 btw thank you for video
I find Gentoo really hard to install. I only got it to install in a VM once, and on hardware no times
Landuke jab at the end... LOVE IT!
Thumbs up 👍 Thank you so much and Keep up your great job
Debian was my first (Sarge)...and remains in my heart.
There are several installation scripts for Arch if people bothered to Google or check Github. It's concerning how many say they gave up on installing Arch. Arch probably isn't for them if some basic Linux CLI is too difficult. There's a good chance they'll run into problems a lot more difficult than installing Arch, which is mostly automated thanks to pacstrap anyways.
Let's say to use the most out of their video card or have it support GLX. Some won't do that without some finagling. Would they know how to issue kernel parameters? Try various distributions of Mesa (github, SVN, etc)? Enable multilib repo for 32-bit support and install the various 64 and 32-bit llvm, DXVK libs, etc.? Probably not. Would they know to install ntfs-g3, so they can write to an NTFS-mounted drive or USB stick? What about lm_sensors and setting up fancontrol, then running it as an enabled service?
Those are just some examples. It's not about being some CLI genius. It's about taking the time to read and enjoy tinkering with things. People who don't like tinkering probably won't stick with Arch. People who do like to tinker and experiment will probably like it because it's more hands-on and there's less pre-installed bloat to fight with. Also, pacman is the best package manager out there... fight me.
Krozar TAL I’ve never used an Arch installation script, having always installed Arch the traditional way. Yet I’m still curious about install scripts. Are there any in particular that you recommend?
I'm always torm between the 2. Super reliability and stability vs bleeding edge, I can never decide
I'm a Debian user. The reason for that is that I've been using it for so long. I should check out an Arch based distro sometime.
If you want any recommendations, in my opinion and many others the best arch based distro for people who wanna get into arch is Manjaro. It has a graphical install which makes it a lot easier to new users and it has a more friendlier community. I use it from time to time even though I don’t mind using vanilla arch I prefer it sometimes. It’s just personal preference.
3:00 I use debootstrap for installing debian.
The content of the video has a point and a purpose, however the presentation sounded like every middle school class presentation, reading a pre-written script in an unenthusiastic monotone voice. Not trying to be too harsh, just feedback.
Dual boot. I saw no benefit to installing plain arch. At the end gnome or whatever was major part of the install. Time to give new debian a go in vm
@ VM versus straight install be another great video drag out all the hardware that has advanced these ideas forward
you're the best . I like the way you conclude at the end" I can't tell you which ist best for you, but i know which one is right for me"haha
I've been very happy with using Pop! OS
BTW, I use Temple os!!!!! 🔥🔥🔥
Liar. Temple OS doesn't have an internet connection. How are you commenting this?
I used here ARCH Linux , I love linux !!! Hugs, Brazil
Richard Stallman. Can't unsee.
I feel like I watched a commercial and didn't get what it was for
I love Debian for supporting all the CPU architectures. I think supporting old hardware is very important aspect of Linux. After all world is drowning in old hardware and there are tons of usecases where old hardware is enough.
I inherited ancient Pentium II 333mhz 384mb laptops. Those have chargers build in them, so you can use just power cord. Because those laptops had parallel ports, those could be used with some car tuning equipment and other "garage hardware", so I installed minimalist Linux to couple of those and donated them to my friend. This was almost decade ago, and they are still in use. Those laptops are from 1998.
I would love to see some distro that is solely focused on bringing as many old computers to life as possible. That would have all the possible drivers, and possible GUIs in the installation media. So that it would be the go-to distro for making any old/ancient computer usable again without hacking, because you don't want to spend much time for getting old hardware to work.
Debian for server, Arch for desktop. Btw I use Debian. Both are amazing.
I wish I could have my Manjaro Linux as my primary OS, but it is not possible. My Sound BlasterX AE5 sounds like an AM radio and the LAPD(?) alsa equalizer doesn't work.
Still need Windoze for my audiophile needs. I do everything in Manjaro that does not involve sound. I even tried the forum, but was useless.. Movies, music and youtube viewing must be on windows :(
I'm using a X99 Asus Deluxe (but it's internal sound codec) is atrocious!! No pre-amp, no EQ nothing. alsa.LAPD.git (sorry, I keep forgetting the real name of it) doesn't work on my machine
In an utopian world, I could use both Linux AND my hardware.. but not Both on this one.. I can only choose one of the options :(
I always use Debian on my home server, but have recently switched to using arch on my desktop and laptop machines because I love tinkering with things. That said, Debian allows a much smoother and easier setup of accessibility tools I need to use a computer, namely speakup/espeakup, speech-dispatcher and orca. That's not to say you can get it working under arch though, it just takes some fiddling, especially because there's bearly any documentation out there for any distro.
I'm not sure users "enable" the AUR so much as choose to use it or not. There's no "enabling" it in pacman.conf. and the AUR does not respond to pacman commands without some kind of (not recommended) helper. One can use "git pull" and "makepkg" to use the AUR without any other "activation" by the user.
You mentioned Arch giving users a "default desktop. Technically that's not really the case. As I'm sure you know Arch uses just the z-shell (zsh) for users to install Arch. Beyond the base system installation and a little configuring nothing else is needed to run Arch. No options for a desktop of any kind are presented and there is no default. GUI's are considered a "post-installation" thing and instructions for installing them are found not in the "installation guide" but in the "post installation recommendations" section of the wiki as a consequence.
Btw I run Peppermint 😎
English Bob I thought you ran Gentoo? 😛
Arch is great for tinkering, testing, gaming, computer entertainment. Debian is great when the server cannot fail, when the computer is making your income, keeping your family secure and putting food on the table.
RTFM are wonderful words, but it does turn others off when you TFM is just as confusing as the tech spec. Don't get me wrong. I don't mind the read, but new users may not be able to tell up from down.
Should I give a thumbs down for declaring yourself an arch user in the end :D ;) .. am a debian user and I think the richness is what makes open source and linux so great. Thank you for the wonderful compare and all ur videos are pretty informative!! Two thumbs up for all the good work !
debian for servers and arch for desktop/developer station.
ArcoLinux - Arch based, the mutts nuts but still have Mint XFCE uefi SSD just in case.
I switched over to debian as I have an unnatural talent in making things crash.
Great video! really enjoyed it. I use Arch :)
Very cute video. Just to add something:
Arch is made by it's community that's for me the very best reason to get it and support it!.
Somewhere my English teacher is smiling because you said "which is the better...". Seriously thanks for the analysis.
Yes, they are both great. BTW I use Fedora, Debian, and Arch.
A few things:
- The GNU project does not officially endorse Debian as a free distro.
- Debian does have a non-free repository (albeit not enabled by default).
- Debian doesn't have a fixed release schedule for its stable releases either, releasing only 'when ready' (typically 2-3 years).
- There is also an unofficial port of Arch for 32-bit x86 PCs
- You have the option of installing only a base system when installing Debian.
Manjaro Unstable is a good compromise. The unstable branch is basically on par with Arch in terms of bleeding edge, but without the pain that comes from installing Arch from scratch. I used to be a Mint user, but couldn't live without the AUR now.
Thumbs up just for the last meme and the head nod.
Arch isn’t “lenient” about non-free, they just don’t bloody care.
That meme at the end XD
switch to Debian when the update drops for the stability then switch pack to Arch after 3~ months because the Debian packages become outdated, then switch again after 2-3~ years to Debian then repeat ecks dee
Debian Sid... constant updated packages and never need to upgrade. Rolling release like Arch.
Both is the correct answer. By the way, I use both.
What is your opinion about Debian 10?
please do a Alsa and PulseAudio tutorial. like how to configure to play 32 bit music at 192khz bit rate or how to configure for 7.1 surround sound all by editing files etc.
For me more than anything distro choice came down to the Arch Wiki, along with the fact that patching is kept so minimal. Recently I installed Kubuntu on my laptop for a quick set up that I needed out of the box, and immediately started to meet problems that felt so damn opaque after spending so much time with Arch. The fact that I hadn't built the system myself also meant I didn't know what the stack looked like, so troubleshooting an issue was made that much harder to boot because I had to figure out what was connecting to what in more complex ways than anything I have set up in Arch.
It did have a pretty slick desktop tho.
Arch updates broke the system too many times to be better than Debian. I use elementaryOS and no matter what I install/remove it doesn't brick the system. Debian is better.
Both Debian and Arch have awesome logos.
I used both and I actually choose distros based on their logos
Nice video, both the distros are good, but I love Debian more and I use Debian.
I will take Debian. I have Arch in one computer, and it's great. It stays updated, but occasionally I half to revert it back the old package and timeshift the thing, while Debian never breaks and keeps on ticking. Debian is a better choice for those who don't care about the flashy things and want to get down to business.
0:58 most AUR is compiled from source