People look down on Arch because the stability story is catastrophic, and Arch users deny that because they have low standards: Parent was surprised that "Some

People look down on Arch because the stability story is catastrophic, and Arch users deny that because they have low standards: Parent was surprised that "Somehow the upgrade didn't completely hose everything" after only 2 years of no updates. It "just" took them "an hour of babysitting it" through cyclic dependency headaches. Child comments proudly proclaim "only seen a handful of actual breakages" (since 2016) and "on the of easiest distros to fix when things go wrong". Compare to my dad's laptop, which has been running Debian for about a decade and often goes multi-year stretches without updates, and has never broken. Not once. That's the kind of performance I expect from an OS.