• How much different is Antergos from Arch?


    Does Antergos add or subtract anything (making arch NOT arch?) from arch, short if it being just an AWESOME installer for an even more awesome distro? Doesn’t antergos install a system that just uses official arch repos anyway?

    I keep reading posts on various forums how antergos, manjaro, archbang are NOT arch… (antergos is arch with an awesome installer, Manjaro is arch but on a “delay” for stability for its userbase, while archbang is just arch + open box) am I right?

    Just asking… there’s so many posts about this, but I would like some input from the devs/maintainers…

  • Does Antergos add or subtract anything (making arch NOT arch?) from arch, short if it being just an AWESOME installer for an even more awesome distro? Doesn’t antergos install a system that just uses official arch repos anyway?

    I keep reading posts on various forums how antergos, manjaro, archbang are NOT arch… (antergos is arch with an awesome installer, Manjaro is arch but on a “delay” for stability for its userbase, while archbang is just arch + open box) am I right?

    Just asking… there’s so many posts about this, but I would like some input from the devs/maintainers…

  • No, it doesn’t add anything
    Couldn’t be more awesome

    BTW, I’m not a maintainer nor developer, I’m just Antergos lover/fanboy

    About Manjaro - it’s extremaly user friendly, but it’s delayed by week or two and it has it’s own repos. Although I like Manjaro and usually I point to Manjaro for new users, today friend of my using Manjaro (by my referral) got Kernel Panic after update. Yayx :< Never happend before to me, but he have some troublesome configuration (UEFI + Windows8.1), so it was more likely, that something will beak after update…

    Anyway, recently I’ve made some short post about ArchLike distros in here: [http://forum.antergos.com/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=1890#p8567][0]">viewtopic.php?f=13&t=1890#p8567

    [0]: <a href=

  • I think the biggest sticking issue for the Arch community is that Antergos has the ‘audacity’

    Speaking strictly for myself, this particular machine has both an Antergos install and an Arch install. And the only difference I see is Antergos is much more polished and elegant than Arch. I will not deny there was a certain sense of satisfaction and accomplishment in using Arch, after having installed it. For a few days after installing Arch, I exclusively ran Arch, for a couple of weeks, after installing it. And then, I logged out of Arch and booted back into Antergos. It just didn’t make sense to keep trying to tweak Arch, in an effort to make it as slick as Antergos, when I already had Antergos installed.

    I suppose it will make some people cringe to hear it, but I also run an Evo/Lution Arch install in VirtualBox. I do see some small differences with that install, but when the rubber hits the road, it is still Arch, too.

    At the end of the day, I run Antergos, simply because it already has all the polish and elegance I want. And because the Antergos support community has been built on a foundation of providing friendly support, rather than gruff admonitions to RTFW.

  • antergos would be much closer than manjaro. you are pulling from the arch repos so not sure what else you would be using?

    its not ubuntu lol

  • Could NOT agree more with you Mike. The guys have done a superb work!

    1.Antergos Linux KDE plasma / Gnome 2.Ubuntu 17.10 64bit Unity
    Intel Core2 Duo CPU P8400 2.26GHz‖ RAM 3908 MiB ‖ Dell Inc. 0F328M - Dell Inc. Latitude E6500
    Intel Mobile 4 Series Chipset Integrated Graphics [8086:2a42] {i915

Posts 6Views 2316
Log in to reply