Could you elaborate on the reform?

For some reason, I was under the impression that laptops in the MNT Reform series were the only laptops that were manufactured using open (source) hardware only. Or, if there were others, that it must have been doing something so special that they deserved to be put on a pedestal. But, currently, I don’t feel confident enough to state why it would be superior over say the Olimex TERES-I or Pinebook Pro.

I hear the hype yet to me it looks like a severely overpriced tv box with some low-grade peripherials strapped to it in the least space efficient way possible.

We definitely pay a premium, but I don’t know exactly why. Especially when the aforementioned Olimex TERES-I and Pinebook Pro are almost an order of magnitude cheaper.

Did they got rockchip to release sources instead of blobs or something?

From what I understood, Rockchip offers (at least some of) its SoCs as open source hardware. So, what MNT Reform did for the SoC is order them as open source hardware and include/publicize/provide all the schematics (etc).

What is the praise actually for?

FWIW, the open source hardware aspect is what I was intrigued by*.

I got a couple I really like, though for vastly different reasons:

• The MNT Reform series takes the crown for their commitment towards open source software AND open source hardware.
• The ASUS Zenbook DUO is an early entry in the direction of what I perceive as peak design. This technology will only improve from here and I hope other vendors will take cues from this one.

i did have to roll back there

I think this is pivotal!

Updates can come with breaking changes. Therefore, the way a distro handles its updates is perhaps more important than its update cadence:

• Some choose to outright freeze packages and only come with security updates
• Others have (almost) excessive testing to prevent breakage
• Yet others employ rollbacks to ensure that the (eventual/inevitable) breakage can easily be deflected
• Finally, there are distros that fall on a spectrum in regards to their more radical state management in hopes of minimizing breakage
• (Though, I’m sure I’ve forgotten some other methods…)
• And, of course, we find combinations of the above employed on the very same distro/system

Sorry for my ramblings, but with M$ sunsetting W10, I feel there’s a great opportunity for Linux to capitalize on this event. Yet, as your own experience clearly shows, the ‘default’ to recommend Mint/Ubuntu/Pop!_OS (or your average Ubuntu-based distro) isn’t always a guarantee for success. And were it not for your insistence on trying out different distros, we might have ‘lost’ you 😭. Hopefully we will ever-adapt as a community to better accommodate the needs of to-be M$-refugees.

but I think I would always wonder if other distros were ‘more’ right for me.

Hahaha, very recognizable.

Your reply is much appreciated as it is yet another piece of (anecdotal) evidence that Arch-based distros can be picked up by complete newbs with success. While I don’t think it’s necessarily for everyone, the almost militant opposition by naysayers isn’t warranted either.

Though I wonder, do you think you’re more ‘tech-savvy’ than the average newcomer? Or, at least, more willing to read/understand/work for your system?

Thanks for sharing your experiences!

Do you think your experiences on Pop!_OS and Kubuntu were instrumental for EndeavourOS working out for ya? Or do you think you could have jumped straight to EndeavourOS successfully?