Not OP, but mostly in the same boat, except I still use Debian for my servers.
My biggest gripe with debian is apt. Compared to pacman, it is just so much worse in just about everything. I realize that it has a slightly more difficult job, but still.
I have found myself too often in situations, where I simply couldn't fix whatever apt was complaining about. With pacman you just specify -d and you're fine (or --force if there's a file conflict).
Also, I've never managed to successfully create my own debian package. With Arch PKGBUILD system, it's a breeze.
It's hard to be very specific here - since I obviously don't remember the exact problems I have encountered.
However here are two examples[0][1] of the sort of problems I mean. Both are non-issues with pacman, I can simply choose to ignore dependencies entirely and fix the problem.
Also I just realized I wrote "apt" before, but I really meant the packaging system itself, not just apt. Which also begs the question, why are there at least 4 seperate programs for package management (apt, apt-get, aptitude, dpkg)?
My biggest gripe with debian is apt. Compared to pacman, it is just so much worse in just about everything. I realize that it has a slightly more difficult job, but still.
I have found myself too often in situations, where I simply couldn't fix whatever apt was complaining about. With pacman you just specify -d and you're fine (or --force if there's a file conflict).
Also, I've never managed to successfully create my own debian package. With Arch PKGBUILD system, it's a breeze.
Just my 2 cents.