Thanks for clarifying. I hope that if they fork it turns out better than Fuduntu or Wolvix: it's so easy to start an independent distro, so difficult to keep it going.

So true. You mention Fuduntu. Just wondering because i can't find any info on it, does any one have any info on Fuse Linux, created by the Fuduntu devs. I'm interested because the Fuduntu devs did not want to switch to Systemd, but since Fuse will be based on Opensuse, (which uses systemd), i'm interested in if they've manged to incorporate systemv into their distro instead, because although i have a strong liking for Opensuse, i do believe it has gone a little down hill since incorporating Systemd, 11.4<.

First they dropped the name Fuse and called it Cloverleaf, then they found it was too much for 3 developers and it's become an extra repository for OpenSUSE, if I've read it correctly:
http://cloverleaf-linux.org/

1 members found this post helpful.

Good choice!

I was going to post this; http://distrowatch.com/search.php?os...&status=Active as alternatives to Arch based on Arch. Guess it's not needed now.

I used Archlinux for some time and then tried many others. I do not think Archlinux is for general users. It seems to be a distribution for testing and refining bleeding edge technologies in Linux, which in itself is a great task. The system is constantly changing and frequently requiring manual intervention. You are busy arranging and cleaning your system all the time rather than focusing on your professional work. It is good for developers and for students for learning Linux systems but not for the masses. There are now a number of rolling-release distributions which also provide stability and which are more directed at increasing Linux usage amongst general people. The foremost appears to be Linux Mint Debian Edition.

Even other distributions which are not rolling-release also provide regular updates and also methods to upgrade when their new version is released. Hence, now I do not find any pressing need for a dedicated rolling-release distribution. Actually, for non-technical persons, stability is a boon and just as one does not want the floor of one's office to be under repair every month, one also does not want his operating system to be changing every few days.

If someone cant figure out how to install the few codecs they may (or may not) want with any rolling release, they probably shouldnt be using a rolling release at all.

'Stablilty' is probably a word best avoided when talking about rolling releases (IMO anyway).

I've never seen why LMDE would be 'more for the masses' than plain old debian testing. Installing codecs is easier, and 'safer', than doing a dist-upgrade....

Another vote for Manjaro. It has the perks of Arch without the setup hassle. (If setting up is a hassle for you) It keeps progressively getting better since it was first released. I'd say it's on par with Mint in ease of use.

+ Rolling Release
+ Easy to Use
+ Latest Packages

LMDE is also decent, but a lot of the packages there are quite old compared to the latest available.