So, someone asked for my impressions of Arch Linux. I haven't used the distributions in years (4-5 years) and it was a distribution I had some problems getting along with mostly because how hostile the community was (or is) back then. When you use distributions like Gentoo, Arch Linux, Slackware you have to commit yourself into reading the documentation and little by little you become more experienced in linux. You also have to be aware of the responsibility of maintaining your operating system, this seems like a very endearing process but it sort of isn't. Community issues on each of those distributions I mentioned above aside. My first week of Arch Linux were really straightforward. The first thing I do every time I install a distribution is simple: - Configure my secondary data storage to be mounted automatically. It used to be a NTFS partition but as of last week I changed it to Ext4 for reasons that I will name here later on. - Install all the applications I use on a daily/weekly basis. (e.g mpd, cantata, gimp, browsers, thunderbird, etc etc) - Install all the 32bit libraries required to run WINE and other 32bit applications - Modify the Desktop Environment to my taste. Usually it's not that far from vanilla. - Install all developments tools I require to program. For example, I'm a web developer and I use python/django a lot. Sometimes PHP, sometimes Java, sometimes C#. - Install vim, because I've learned to love it. (in fact I wrote this post with Vim to keep a local copy of this post) As you see my desktop setup isn't complex, it's not out of this world. I use my desktop for casual usage, and I completely love it. So how does Arch Linux perform? I still haven't learned all pacman stuff. Normally, it takes a bit of time to adapt to a new distribution with a different package manager. That said, the installation of Arch Linux is rather simple and straightforward for me. Originally, I was planning to install Manjaro but its installer doesn't work well with my hardware so I said "screw that, I'm install Arch!". Once installed, I did the steps above. I proceeded to install kde full package (meta package) and xserver stuff. I went ahead and install the NVIDIA blobs from the repositories. After all that I decided to install PulseAudio, because regardless on how many people hate it PulseAudio is what keeps my sanity when handling application audio per volume and how amazing it is managing different streams per audio device. Daerandin, a member and staff in this forum once said to me that pulseaudio works flawlessly. Now, why would this matter you say? If you have noticed there are users wih a lot of audio problems when it comes to WINE. The infamous ALSA underrun problem that is. Arch Linux provides one hell of a pulseaudio binary as I have yet to run into audio problems. I would dare ask what the heck is going on with Debian pulseaudio, I don't know if it's patched or not but to run WINE games normally and not run into underruns has been a true bliss. So there you have it, I've had a better experience with ArchLinux's pulseaudio package than any debian-based distribution out there. Quite a mystery if you'd ask me. Arch Linux is very stable as in I've yet to run into a library or application causing problems. In the past I steered away from Arch Linux because it was quite the opposite, any upgrade broke my system super fast. Performance? The same as many distributions, I don't think this one will change much. As for the Hard Drive issue, there's a problem we need to be aware of using NTFS partitions on linux. It's a problem that goes under our radar most of the time because we aren't aware. Sometimes if there's a power outage then there might be data loss. The NTFS partition hardly recovers, sometimes it's not even related to the data loss and you can see various files getting corrupted and reaching 0 bytes. This is why I had to change from NTFS to EXT4. After I changed it the data loss and corruption stopped. Be wary of using NTFS partitions on prolonged time. AUR, a community driven repository has proven to be one of the most useful additions in Arch Linux. I've found it to be super handy when it comes to needing packages like emulators that aren't support in the main repos. Now the big question here: Would I recommend Arch Linux to someone? No. If the person is starting I think there are better suited distributions out there like OpenSUSE that will make the experience totally worth it. Now, if the person hungers to learn and is a developer, then I would say "go for Arch Linux". Let me be clear in one thing. Just because the user has technical knowledge or is a developer doesn't mean HE or SHE is expected to use an advanced linux distribution. I'd like to make this point crystal clear that every person has different priorities and his or her experience shouldn't be questioned just because the OS is a newbie friendly one. That type of mindset has to end. I hope you guys enjoyed the post. Let me know if you have any questions!