The vast majority of Arch derivates are still Arch with some candy on top. Endeavour for example is just an installer, a default package selection, a handful of non-essential packages of their own and some desktop eye-candy – in other words the absolute minimum so it can be called a distinct distro. But it’s very much Arch inside.
Manjaro uses Arch as an upstream distro but modifies packages extensively, uses its graphical installer to actually autodetect and install everything a machine might need by default, has designed an user-friendly package manager interface on top of pamac, adds a driver manager with autodetect, a kernel manager and so on.
Unfortunately this puts Manjaro on the hatelist for two groups: a section of the Arch community who hate anything that makes Arch less hardcore, and Linux newbs that get tricked by Manjaro’s self-claim of “user friendly” and end up bricking their system then go around telling everybody how much it sucks and how “it just broke”.
Ironically, if you leave Manjaro the fuck alone and don’t do dumb stuff like use a non-LTS kernel or switch to the non-stable branches or install critical system components from AUR etc. it tends to be super-stable. Unfortunately it tends to attract users for all the wrong reasons.
To answer your question, to recommend it to people it depends a lot on the type of people. I’m an experienced Linux user, I know what stuff to not do and what to not install from AUR etc. At the other extreme I have completely Linux-clueless family members using Manjaro perfectly fine because they don’t have sudo rights and they can’t fuck it up. But there’s a type of Linux user that falls in between that’s going to mess around and screw up and then blame the distro for things that if they did on Arch they’d get told to GTFO – and I think those people should not use Manjaro or any Arch distro because they’re dumb and hateful and Arch-based stuff requires a bit of brain and a willingness to learn.
The vast majority of Arch derivates are still Arch with some candy on top. Endeavour for example is just an installer, a default package selection, a handful of non-essential packages of their own and some desktop eye-candy – in other words the absolute minimum so it can be called a distinct distro. But it’s very much Arch inside.
Manjaro uses Arch as an upstream distro but modifies packages extensively, uses its graphical installer to actually autodetect and install everything a machine might need by default, has designed an user-friendly package manager interface on top of pamac, adds a driver manager with autodetect, a kernel manager and so on.
Unfortunately this puts Manjaro on the hatelist for two groups: a section of the Arch community who hate anything that makes Arch less hardcore, and Linux newbs that get tricked by Manjaro’s self-claim of “user friendly” and end up bricking their system then go around telling everybody how much it sucks and how “it just broke”.
Ironically, if you leave Manjaro the fuck alone and don’t do dumb stuff like use a non-LTS kernel or switch to the non-stable branches or install critical system components from AUR etc. it tends to be super-stable. Unfortunately it tends to attract users for all the wrong reasons.
To answer your question, to recommend it to people it depends a lot on the type of people. I’m an experienced Linux user, I know what stuff to not do and what to not install from AUR etc. At the other extreme I have completely Linux-clueless family members using Manjaro perfectly fine because they don’t have sudo rights and they can’t fuck it up. But there’s a type of Linux user that falls in between that’s going to mess around and screw up and then blame the distro for things that if they did on Arch they’d get told to GTFO – and I think those people should not use Manjaro or any Arch distro because they’re dumb and hateful and Arch-based stuff requires a bit of brain and a willingness to learn.