Add to Chrome
Add to Edge
Add to Firefox
Add to Opera
Add to Brave
Add to Safariw3m vs Artix Linux
When comparing w3m vs Artix Linux, the Slant community recommends Artix Linux for most people. In the question“What are the best web browsers for UNIX-like systems?” Artix Linux is ranked 21st while w3m is ranked 25th.
Specs
Question Ranking
Pros
Pro Support for several elements not found in terminal browsers
Although w3m is primarily a text-based web browser which runs inside the terminal, it supports and renders several elements which other terminal-based browsers cannot like images, tables, tabs or frames.
Pro Available as emacs plugin
W3m can also be downloaded as an emacs plugins to be used as a fast web browser that runs inside emacs.
Pro No systemd
Pro Runit
Artix actively supports the runit init system known from Void Linux. (Equally besides the OpenRC init system known from Gentoo).
Pro Close to bare Arch Linux
No learning curve if you're coming from Arch or any of its derivatives.
Pro Lightweight
Only the software you would need like Terminal emulator, file manager, media player and a browser.
Pro Compatible with Arch Repositories
It is fully compatible with almost all packages from community, extra, multilib and AUR.
Pro Rolling distro
Pro Flexibility
You can have a functional system in less than 10 mins using GUI installer OR you can do it "the Arch way".
Cons
Con Steep learning curve
Being a terminal web browser w3m has a certain learning curve because you need to learn the keystrokes and different commands.
Con No systemd
Some packages flat out won't work because systemd is non existent, sadly pipewire needs systemd to run. Hopefully Pipewire becomes usable soon. Edit: Pipewire does work but you will have to make a startup script.
Con Few Arch packages might not be available yet
Developers are working migrating all packages into their own repositories while ensuring there's no systemd malware.
Con No tiling WM (i3/sway) out of the box
