Hey Jow Forums i have a doubt, now i'm using arch, but what would be the difference between the manjaro...

Yes, you're being lucky.

You can have everything on any of these.
The difference is that manjaro omits installation which is essential part of using Arch. It goes against main points of using Arch, if you do not want to be power user and learn how your system works just pick some *buntu or mint. For experienced user manual installation can take less than clicking all the things through gui.

Used manjaro for two years now, no issues at all w/ the os, it's just arch on easy

I understand, it's basically a choice of preferences.

The choices are not equal though.
Using manjaro is like buying a car but driving only on autopilot. You kind of want to have a car to go wherever you want, but you don't want to learn how to drive so you limit yourself to where autopilot can take you and you are going to be fucked when it breaks.

This is a great analogy.

What exactly is stopping you from turning off that autopilot and learning how to drive it though? Not everyone wants to obviously but you can if you want to. I understand the argument of just installing Arch to begin with if you wanted to do that but that can't be the only reason, can it?

>Hey Jow Forums i have a doubt
Pajeet detected. All the h1b pajeets say "I have a doubt" instead of asking "I have a question"

Use Parabola GNU/Linux-libre.
It's Arch based, has no propietary code in it whatsoever, it's endorsed by the FSF, and all the programs in its repositories are libre.
You can even migrate your current Arch/Manjaro setup to Parabola.

Manjaro uses its own repos where it holds packages back for an arbitrary period of time because it supposedly makes things less likely to break" when it actually does no such thing, and instead just delays breakage. It's run by people who can't into ssl certs or proper security. It intentionally blurs the lines between officially supported repo packages and unsupported, "use at your own risk" AUR packages.

If you're too brainlet to copy commands from the wiki to install Arch but you want full rolling release and your leet ricer meme shit, at least use fucking Antergos.

Or this. This is good too.

you need to tick an option to use AUR package with pamac anyway

>ctrl f
>no antegros
>antergos.com/

its arch minus the autism

Plus they don’t push updates as fast as arch. And they have dummy GUI kernel and nonfree graphics installers. Arch users just don’t want to admit that the installer is the least important part of an OS

>arch without autism
There's no such thing

So what if I don't want to know how to do the long-ass installation process with e.g. partitioning all disks manually and just want to use a rolling release distro with a good community and documentation?
"If shit breaks", then there will always be people before me who had the exact same issue on their machine. I'll just fire up my search engine and look for the fix. There's no magic in running one terminal command after another and maybe edit some files with nano.

Partitioning does not take long. It's just few commands, it takes less than copying files to disk.
If user doesn't know how his system works, it will be very challenging for him to even find the error message. If he does know it, he will install arch in dozen of minutes.

>massive faggot

Based trips