I can’t be the only one who had Arch on a system before getting a smartphone

But that issue is solved for many years now. Although it makes a certain kind of sense: a lot of the Arch hate and memes causes we to question if that person has actually used Arch in years. So a lot of those ideas may be indeed ancient experiences surviving purely in memes and stories.

Also ich kenn mindestens eine VHS, die noch nicht weiß, dass das Internet überhaupt existiert. Die müsste ich wohl persönlich oder per Fax anstubsen, vermutlich mit mäßigem Erfolg.

None of those graph ever are. Because Linux users are more prone to tinkering, keeping stuff private and blocking a lot of bullshit scripting, there is big dark area of Linux systems listing themselves as something else (usually Windows because of those asshole websites not playing well with Linux by design without an actual valid reason other than "we don't like Linux").

(PS: For the same reason a lot of sites believe I'm using Chrome. I don't but I know they like to fuck with me when they see that Firefox user agent.)

Thing is you can often debunk any of these graphs for the same reason. Just a minority of Linux systems actually show up as Linux as the users are usually more inclined to block a lot of stuff for privacy reasons, then often also changing the user agent most tests fall back to.

Manjaro which is less stable than Arch in my experience.

That's because their whole concept is bullshit. Delaying updates for two weeks would make sense, when they actually used that time frame for testing and to fix bugs before release. In reality they just delay everything without sense, so you actually get the same bugs, just 2 weeks later because the fixes are also delayed.

And then they add access to the AUR (by default even, where Arch warns people about the risks) which assumes an up-to-date system, not one lagging 2 weeks behind. Which is a big shiny invitation to dependency hell.

Sadly those benchmarks only tell me that they did test only two file systems on LUKS...

I was too lazy for scripting the update to check the news and just get a mail when the update has issues... or should get one.

In reality I check if the email process still works once every blue moon because I didn't get one from a failed update in years.

I think you can get problems once you are a full release cycle behind the last supported one.

Funnily enough it's mostly an issue with mirrors and signing keys, so basically the same fix Arch users need if they are behind for many months: update the packages for keys and mirrors first, everyting else afterwards.

Well... because of longer testing periods and a lot of stuff never even considered until stale the stable distros indeed have less bugs. The ones that still slip through however will basically not get fixes for years.

On the other hand I have seen a lot of bugs on Arch... but I usually don't care and just assume (rightfully so in 99% of the cases) that they get fixed within hours.

I wonder how many Arch haters have actually used Arch and ever ran into a breaking issue.

A lot... they install it, screw up because they didn't bother to read the instructions, then did the usual... a new install.

Those who pass the first basic barrier to just chroot into the system and fix a simple mistake or roll back a package for the few hours it takes to get fixed instead of starting fresh usually stay for a long time...

In fact with the people I know there is a correlation between either "oh, I don't bother to fix anything and just do a fresh install (that idea is especially persistent in Windows users)" or "there's a big distro upgrade that had issues" and distro hopping. Once you settled on a rolling release and learned the basics in terms of fixing stuff the urge to hop yet another time vanishes for many.

Bevorzugt in 60kg Portionen?

As everyone knew it would happen once the loud, crying propagandists screamed about deporting criminal Afghans while actually nullifying already existing visa for Afghans that helped the German army for years...