

Nice yeah I gave snaps a fair shot when they rolled out but then I witnessed firsthand the horrible upgrade experience that is snap with a Firefox upgrade and removed it. Fuck snaps.
The way I see Arch upgrades you really have 2 choices with their own pros and cons:
Upgrade infrequently (say once a month):
Pros: software stays the same so nothing breaks, no forced restarting of anything. Cons: If a new package broke something, you now have a much more difficult time picking out which package out of hundreds caused the trouble. I’ve heard that waiting too long to upgrade can cause things to break.
Upgrade frequently (every day which is what I do):
Pros: If a package caused an issue, you can more easily narrow it down and exclude it from updates. I had to do this for a few months after Plasma 6 was released, it was unusable. Cons: More restarting of services and reboots to ensure you’re on the latest version. When there are KDE core upgrades I’ll relog my session because sometimes things get weird with old and new libraries being used at the same time. There’s also just more useless system activity this way, for example sometimes I’ll update my kernel twice in a week but not reboot for a week or two. I now exclude kernel updates until I’m ready to reboot to avoid disk writes.
I really like how Debian and most other distros explicitly tell you that the update you’re doing is a security update. On Arch a typo fix warrants you installing a whole new version of the package.
I’ve noticed this too. I’ve given up on it and instruct others to look for programs in the start menu alphabetically instead of searching because even that is bad. Same with Outlook searches, I instruct people to use webmail because the searching works there.