Yeah, I suppose I can say that something like Arch is fairly pointless to someone who doesn't have interest in building their system from the command line. I do forget that people actually consider it 'minimalist', whereas I actually find myself tending to think to think Arch is pretty damn bloated - compared to a *BSD or compiled distros, for example.
In the case of Arch, I have set up my system, and then I no longer think about it. A balance between comparative minimalism and being featureful is comfortable, because on smaller systems there is less room for unwanted, unexpected behaviour.
>Unused RAM is wasted RAM>Unused processing power is wasted processing power.
I would agree, but the key notion to take from that is not that you have it so you must use it - rather, it's not to buy so much RAM and processing power you don't strictly need to begin with. I could comfortably do work and personal activities on a 30 quid bargain bin laptop.
I would wear that as a badge of honour, lmao.
My argumentativeness aside, I do understand what you're saying, I honestly doubt Arch is well-suited for more than a specific subset of people using Linux. As it is with approaches to life as a whole, everyone has something specific that works for them. I wouldn't knock someone using something else if they had an informed opinion about why they did so. Even, Allah forbid, Solus :^).