Had a first run with Ungoogled Chromium and LibreWolf from AUR with Manjaro using Yay AUR helper. Took a long time to run the compilation and Ungoogled Chromium threw up an error message and quit whilst LibreWolf just hangs there without error message after some time.
Very disappointed indeed for wasting time.
In agreement with the above, there are often several versions of the same software in AUR. Some are outdated, some are dev, etc. You need to look at the ratings and the description and make sure you pick the best package for yourself.The thing with the AUR is that virtually all packages there are built from source. You pretty much compile the package than install it, which takes a much longer time due to the compiling aspect of it. The speed of it will really depend on your processor and how fast it can handle it. The AUR is great and all, but IMHO, I think it's a little overrated. It's nice that people can write scripts to install virtually every package available on Linux, but really if you think about it, it's just a gap stop compared to Debian and Redhat based distros. Debian especially has the largest repo, with the most officially supported apps. Many of the AUR scripts take a .deb file and configure it to install and run on Arch/Arch based distros. Arch by comparison doesn't have no where near the repo size that Debian and RedHat do, but the AUR makes up for that.
The one thing to note about the AUR is that it is not officially maintained by Arch devs. By it's very name it's maintained by users in the community. While people keep an eye on things, there's always the potential for someone to load malware on to it. It's the reason why Manjaro and even Arch don't enable it by default and put up warnings about using it. Not that it's not good and not safe, but they just want users to know that you have to be more vigilant, as anything can happen.
Don't get me wrong, I really like Manjaro, I think it's a fantastic distribution, but as with anything, nothing is ever truly perfect and all distros will have their pro's and con's
Since Ubuntu left GNOME 2, I haven't used GNOME again, GNOME 3 is like Windows in terms of resources, (information from some people who have used it)
Xfce packs a lot of functionality. It is not gorgeous like KDE but it works just as well in my experience.Raiden you can make every DE looks beautiful. It's really all about functionality.
KDE DE and apps are more powerful and customizable. This is very important to me. But some people perfer basics. When i try other DE it fells so empty but i've been KDE user for 20 years.
KDE Plasma is stable as hell. I can't remember last time it crashed.
Looks really nice!
@Raiden, Manjaro and MX Linux have done a good job with XFCE.Looks really nice!
I do agree, out of the box xfce really is not very appealing to the eye. Take some time and you can make it look really nice! Manjaro does a good job of teeming out their xfce version to look reakky good out of the box.