Kind of reminds me of this article. You say you're more productive but honestly: how much time have you spent working on and customising your OS and is it a continuous project? Can you really say you're more productive than the people who open their lid and just work?
By tinkering and customizing you might gain a productive work environment but the way I see it is that some people just want to tinker because it makes them happy. The ’increased productivity’ seems to be more of a way to rationalize it to oneself.
- Knowing what happens if I have the audacity to update my computer without reading 3 different forum threads
- Understanding how to fix hilariously bad font rendering issues in a terminal, a software paradigm that's almost as old as computers themselves
- Tempering expectations that incredibly obscure apps like "Spotify" will "just work".
I think to imply Arch teaches much beyond the skills needed to deal with Arch Linux is a tenuous premise at best.
Agreed on the fonts, that has always been a pain. That being said, I recently installed Arch on a new laptop and the fonts weren't too bad out of the box - times change.
I update at least twice a week and I've only had one breakage in 3 years - I didn't update a config file with some new settings.
All in all, your response comes across a little FUDdy IMO.
Honestly, I don't understand what makes Arch so special.
I have mostly learned things on Ubuntu and I can use Arch just fine, and I think I have a decent understanding how things work.
Really, I think there is nothing fundamentally different across these distributions technically speaking.
Their biggest differences lie in their package and release management and policies (and, agreed, this is huge).
I'm not sure what skill you would learn on Arch and not on Ubuntu. It seems some vocal Arch users are lying to themselves and to the rest of the world about this.
Gentoo (or LFS) might probably be more educational, but I haven't used Gentoo enough, and haven't tried LFS enough to say.
(Kudos for Arch's documentation though, useful even when using another distro)
I don't particularly care for the whole DIY aspect. I spend enough time tinkering with Emacs and other tools that I don't want to waste any time on configuring/tweaking the OS itself. The different Manjaro versions are pretty decent (currently using the Awesome WM one), and I really like the Manjaro CLI installer (manjaro-architect) if I want a bit more control over my installation.
Now, don't put Arch on your servers either because there's no real security story for Arch, but in that time I have learned tons about systemd, and you can't put a price on that.
On the Asus Nvidia updates broke my Windows manager on Ubuntu it not happen with Arch.
The Arch install is a little bit more complex but you can do exactly what you want which was for me: use systemd boot instead of grub, and cipher only the home partition.
Once the setup is done, I did not have any issue, fiddling to be done.
For me where I lost time on Linux was when I tried to customize my desktop environment to my liking with i3/polybar/etc. Now I just run Gnome3 on Wayland, far from perfect but it is a good compromise TBH between setup ease/integrated UI components and features.
I think that archlinuxs advantage is that it's minimalistic, the philosophy is simple, you know what is running on your computer and generally why.
Tinkering with arch itself isn't that time consuming because the package management is so incredibly good, along with the AUR and wiki. These are invaluable.
I really do think the difficulty is overhyped though, it's really not hard at all.
But there are always going to be exceptions, new problems will arise that will slow you down. That's another reason why I'm on a mainstream OS and not linux, because when I do encounter a problem that slows me down, devs work at breakneck speed to fix bugs and there is extensive documentation because the community is much larger than the linux community. I'd be spending waaay too much time in the weeds on ubuntu, sifting through pages of SEO crap search results to find the one sage forum post from 10 years ago with now deleted screenshots, just trying to run the software and workflows I know like the back of my hand on macos. I don't want to start over and be a dumbass again, I've found my niche.
Sure, it’s one thing to compare knowledge that you already have. But does macOS even have a counterpart to the Arch Wiki for those starting out?
I bought a pre configured Linux computer (laptop). They’re not very common but common enough.
I haven’t had to spend any time with setup, and frankly I’ve been pleased that everything just works. My main complaint it Battery life isn’t terrible but isn’t great but for what I do it’s good enough.
I don't know if overall all the tinkering I've done over the years was a net positive in terms of efficient use of working hours.
But I can for sure tell you that if I've just opened my lid and worked, I would have been much less satisfied while working when I would constantly run into unnecessary limitations of my tools. Hard to put a quantifier on work satisfaction.
As a professional, using the right tools for your job should be part of your job. You wouldn't trust a workman hammering a nail into the wall with a screwdriver just because that's the only tool in his tool belt.
And this isn't even an exaggerated metaphor. For decades Windows was unusable OOTB for any serious development. OSX is still handicapped by a decades old userspace (better than nothing but not good).
1. Do you know what the end state is, and do you know that you'll be significantly more productive? If so, then spend some real time on it.
2. Do you not know what the end state is, OR are you not sure what the best setup is? If so, then do the absolute minimum amount of work to make your changes functional and no more. Then use the incomplete setup for a while and see how it feels.
3. Are you not sure of the end state, AND are you not sure it will make you more productive? Then put it off and keep using your current setup, or at most try it out on a separate computer in your free time.
It's not unlike working on software architecture. You can get so focused on good architecture and clean code that you never get any real work done. Some code is fine to leave ugly. But not all code -- the art is knowing when code actually needs to be refactored, and figuring out how to refactor it in a way that doesn't lock you out of developing new features for a month.
Environment customization is the same way.
- I do open a laptop and just work. Using configuration that I’ve already created to suit my work.
- Other people is a big group, and one that doesn’t matter so much here. I’m more productive using what I’ve opted to change than without. Yes, the minor time investment was worth it.
It may not be by 30-40% as some people claim, but even at 1% that's around 20 hours in a year assuming a light schedule (40 hours a week 48 weeks a year).
But just because you are using Linux, doesn't mean you have to spend a lot of time customizing. Actually, customizing can be a lot quicker on Linux than on Windows for example (due to the well-integrated package managers).
That said, I do think that some customizations help with productivity, but you should know your limits. If you are trying something completely new, which nobody has done before, you are unlikely to find huge productivity boosts. But if you cautiously follow some best practices you might find some productivity treasures.
ps: one talk that I find a pretty strong example is "the unix chainsaw" by Gary Bernhardt (of wat js fame). He shows how to using tools `against` themselves, as data, to help your work. It's not rocket science, but it's 1) something I rarely do truly 2) easy to fall back as tools as silos instead of .. `objects` collaborating.
Agreed, this doesn’t apply to everyone. Years ago, every 6 months I’d switch to Linux/hackintosh purely out of frustration (or envy) as OSX looked sooo much better than anything else (antialiasing!) AND supported Adobe CC.
Nowadays I’m a Mac user and I’m unlikely to switch, because I’ve grown a bit tired of my tweaking marathons and need a proper *nix system.
I wish Windows just became a GUI layer on top of Linux though.