I recently tried to install antergos which is basically arch.
Graphics drivers didnt work during install, no big deal, I'll just use text mode. Except the text mode didnt work either for some reason. To fix the issue I would have had to compile my own image, or to trust some random guy on github that he didnt put a rootkit in his installer.
There are definitely annoyances like these which you dont have on windows/mac. You dont need to be a good programmer/hacker to fix issues like this, yet on linux, you sometimes do.
While I really love linux and its distributions, you cant expect endusers to run them without big issues
Who the hell would recommend an Arch flavor to ordinary users? Windows/MacOS should be compared to Ubuntu/Fedora(/Tubleweed). Arch is not ready for anyone who is not very interested in their OS.
I wouldnt recommend Arch to an enduser, that was me trying to install it and failing.
Can ubuntu nowadays install nvidia drivers or does that still not work? For an enduser "installing graphic drivers" is not particularely easy ("what is a driver, why do I need it", etc), yet something pretty basic ("why does this [linux compiled, opengl] game run at 1 fps?")
The work laptop I'm typing this on has NVidia graphics, but all the driver stuff was handled automatically in the installation process and I never even thought about it. I just checked and found the setting where I can stop using proprietary drivers but you have to go out of your way to find that sort of thing.
Arch is pretty much meant for people who are comfortable with this kind of failures. It even expects you it install it by yourself, with no installer, so well...
Such a Linux Desktop evangelist comment chain. Step one: ask what problems people are talking about. Step two: completely dismiss and downvote all responses.
