Pinebook pro is using an arm64 cpu instead of an x86. That creates a big list of problems that you don't have on x86 because that's what all linux desktop developers have (mostly) been targeting.
As one example, I was surprised to find that the tor browser doesn't have an arm64 build :o
I've installed a few dozen AUR packages that only needed aarch64 added to the arch list. I think only one, syncterm, required any other modifications to build and even that was just setting a preprocessor define (__arm__).
Thus far, it's my favourite laptop purchase ever. Beats the feeling I got with the IBM X series or the Ti Book. It's light, zippy enough, great Linux hardware support, and totally silent.
Even if you did swap a symlink to upgrade to GLES3, all the apps will still call the GLES2 functions. No matter what, the devs would have to go back and rewrite their app to actually use the new features.
Many apps detect GL level and adapt renderers accordingly.
Still, it's not just graphics drivers: there's the oft-cited security patches, but also features for user-facing interfaces; Ie, an update to a URL parsing library might add additional codepage support transparently to an app that uses it.
Forcing Arch model on eveyone is a perfect way for Linux to forever stay minority platform. There's a reason why most people do not run rolling distros.
Might be nice for hardcore fans, but good luck supporting anything there.
I've observed a lot of recent Manjaro adoption lately (I don't know what the real numbers are). Anecdotal, but in my social circles I'm seeing people moving from Ubuntu to either Manjaro or Arch.
Don't be surprised when all the mainstream distros switch to sandboxed app model as the preferred one. Distro-based packaging of the entire world is hiting the not enough manpower problem today and eventually will be eventually relegated to super fans distro only, with similar status as Amiga has today.
As Arch Linux user I am completely confused. Looks like there is no official comparison page like [1]. Web search first entries [2], [3] gives another picture — more stable, graphical installer, graphical package manager, hardware detection, prepackaged desktop environments — that I can relate to.
Nothing about "based on the AUR". Because it is liability. It is insecure, have to check PKGBUILD each install and update.
I should have been more clear. In terms of package management Manjaro has access to the AUR, but it's unsupported. Manjaro does not have access to official Arch repositories. Sorry, I should have said "based on Arch" not "based on the AUR." https://wiki.manjaro.org/index.php/Arch_User_Repository
Ok, I would not recommend Arch as a first Linux distro, Arch based and easy to start is a plus. That said I've seen troubled Manjaro user on xmonad IRC, we tracked problem to AUR package, it worked fine on Arch.
Yeah, Arch Linux is definitely not for beginners. The install process alone is hands-on and requires users to be experienced with command line configuration. Arch is for power users who want a ports-based Linux with great package management (pacman).
Why would you expect to have a git snapshot shipped as the official freedesktop flatpak runtime? Could you not build your own freedesktop flatpak runtime using mesa git head?
For instance: the Pinebook Pro just got gles3 support via upstream mesa, but all the flatpaks with mesa haven't or won't update with any alacrity.
Users are left having to abandon sandboxing in order to get necessary updates.