People compare the two (and I guess they both describe themselves as "package managers") but I see the use-cases as very different. Apt is what the whole OS is

People compare the two (and I guess they both describe themselves as "package managers") but I see the use-cases as very different. Apt is what the whole OS is built around and managed by the system administrator while Homebrew is only for a subset of things and almost always managed by a user. I've been using Homebrew for years and the consensus I've seen has almost always been positive. The only time I've had issues is where I removed dependencies but didn't rebuild the package. I've heard about multi-user issues with Homebrew but have never personally used it like that. I wouldn't describe it as "quite unstable."