Manjaro vs Antergos. Whats better /g/?

>>62051086
Manjaro

>>62051086
Antergos because it uses the Arch Linux repositories whereas Manjaro doesn't and uses their own repos that aren't as bleeding edge. Antergos is just Arch with a GUI installer. I'm using it right now.

Antergos, because Pamac on Antergos can use AUR straight out of the box.

none, stop being lazy and install gentoo

>>62051259
I have other things to do than compiling everything I use thanks

>>62051086
Both have no reason to exist when arch exists, and arch has no reason to exist when void exists.

Windows 10

>>62051086

Antergods

manjaro
its disto of it own with some safety net against arch issues
antergos is installer for bare arch+de, feels meh out of the box

>>62051279
Void is void of packages, like seriously you might as well use gentoo if you're compiling 90% of your installed packages

Why not just install Arch-Anywhere?

I've used Antergos for a couple of years and the answer is Manjaro, Antergos is pretty much Arch with an installer, it's easier to install but it suffers from the same problems, it's too bleeding edge, if that's your thing then Antergos > Manjaro.

Manjaro on the other hand has "releases", every week you'll have 10 or so updates, but just once a week, it's much more stable.

Manjaro also comes with tools that really save you a lot of work, Manjaro settings, while simple, provides a Ubuntu like control panel to manage kernels, proprietary drivers, language packs, etc.

I'm currently using Manjaro GNOME it's the best distro I've ever used

>>62051259
Being lazy is being efficient.

I'll stick with being lazy, thank you.

Antergos and wipe the antergos s**t

File: 27d539d9-69e4-4ef8-a399-c1110e8853fb..gif (913KB, 497x497px) Image search: [Google]

913KB, 497x497px

>>62051440
my kneejer

>>62051133
Oh 2 weeks behind, big nothing.
>>62051157
All it takes is to toggle a setting in pamac

File: Untitled.png (566KB, 1024x1024px) Image search: [Google]

566KB, 1024x1024px

Install Arch Linux.

>>62051086
Arch lol

>>62052087
This.

I've tried both twice and they are the same.

Antergos, im using it too, if you want to use arch and want it out of the box, antergos is the best for you, i don't no recommend manjaro because soon or late their package manage breaks somehow, while antergos even have inside a warning script if the packages to update are going to present problems or break your system

Neither. I've found arch anywhere to be the best way to use Linux period. It's a fully customized installation but simplified and it's on top of my favorite distro.
If you've never tried it you should

between antergos and manjaro, antergos is better.
I would recommend arch-anywhere over both though.

I have been running Arch proper since 2012 on all my main computers, but I have recently gotten interested in some of these derivatives as I have a friend who would like to make the switch to GNU/Linux and at present has only been exposed to Canonibot. I think that an Arch derivative is probably the way to go for him.

Manjaro seems nice but AUR out of the box for Antegros seems handy. Still, why not just use ArchBang?

>>62051086
Antergos root ZFS.

>>62052503
What the fuck, AUR is just a button you click in pamac. Is your friend to retarded to check a box?

>arch for imbeciles vs arch for morons

>>62051086
OpenSUSE