This type of update is like an ubuntu version upgrade (12.10 => 13.04), I don't know of a single instance where that didn't go wrong at some point.
Ok, I'll stop. You're right, they're not risk takers. But they do get the necessary groundwork done. The same Red Hat did with d-bus (based on DCOP, a KDE3 technology).Listing contractors is not helpfull. Contractors are by defintion NOT risk takers.
What the hell? People will compare to other products out there, and that is opinion. It is relevant.Personal opion has no relevancy.
Careful there (to not fall into Shuttleworth's arguments). Word it a different way, like "Arch is for technical/advanced users". But I agree.Arch is not made for substandard users
Windows suffer lot of breakage between upgrade too, my point is no OS is invulnerable to breakage once in a while
well systemd is easy enough since arch and sabayon add services file automagically[in gentoo is by hand but still service file are extremely easy to make], so i don't get what all that drama is about it with systemd
Whatever. Go on about how ubuntu is amazing and this and that. I couldn't care less what you use and what you think of other distros. What I do care about is free software, and good solutions. Mir IMO isn't a good solution, and shame on canonical for creating (trying to) a rift in the FOSS world.Q) Why would I not want to use Arch?
you believe an operating system should configure itself, run out of the box, and include a complete default set of software and desktop environment on the installation media.