Oh, there are tons of distros where you don’t need to use the terminal for anything, even Manjaro, an arch based distro, doesn’t need you to ever open the terminal. I was just saying that if adoption is the goal then using the terminal can’t be a requirement for a normal user experience.
What I mean is that using the terminal isn’t mandatory in Manjaro while Arch and Arch based distros all require it. So for that it’s an excellent example.
As for stability it’s a bit more stable than Arch itself from my experience but I still has issues. The most stable distro I have used was Pop OS, I didn’t have a single issue there for like 3 years straight, I only switched because of a hardware change and Pop OS’s Mesa version was unstable on the new hardware.
My central point is still that you will never in a million years get the average computer user to use a terminal.
Oh, there are tons of distros where you don’t need to use the terminal for anything, even Manjaro, an arch based distro, doesn’t need you to ever open the terminal. I was just saying that if adoption is the goal then using the terminal can’t be a requirement for a normal user experience.
Wrong example, Manjaro is probably the less stables distro i’ve tried, and thoses issues seems to be common when you look at the forum
What I mean is that using the terminal isn’t mandatory in Manjaro while Arch and Arch based distros all require it. So for that it’s an excellent example.
As for stability it’s a bit more stable than Arch itself from my experience but I still has issues. The most stable distro I have used was Pop OS, I didn’t have a single issue there for like 3 years straight, I only switched because of a hardware change and Pop OS’s Mesa version was unstable on the new hardware.
My central point is still that you will never in a million years get the average computer user to use a terminal.