Arch is like Slackware or Gentoo: you’ll like it if it’s the sort of thing you like, and if you do like it you can easily become a little over-enthusiastic!

The first requirement is to print out a copy of the beginner’s guide, because there’s no installer: it’s all done by hand with about a dozen commands to enter (like ‘genfstab -p /mnt >> /mnt/etc/fstab’) and some files to edit. There is a manual on the disk (install.txt) which you can view with ‘more’ in tty2, but it’s very sketchy: typical instructions are ‘partition the disk’ and ‘install grub’.

One should end up with a CLI installation into which one can boot, install a graphical environment, create a user, and add programs. The last time I tested Arch, it took a whole day to get a usable system. This time I lost my internet connection halfway though downloading the packages for the GUI, and I never manged to get it back.

If the ‘Arch Way’ appeals to you, then I’d advise cheating and installing it via Archbang or Bridge!

First off: I LOVE Arch Linux. It's the one I've learned the most from. The lack of a decent installer (CLI as suggested here?) kills the whole thing.
If you have some users running the thing and there's a crash, forget about a quick re-install with the latest one.
At crunch time, setting up an installer and letting it do the install (semi) unattended is a must.
Where did my update go wrong? By using the wrong console. I had a remainder of my Gnome desktop still around after I moved to XFCE, the Gnome terminal failed to save the Kernel path properly, thus I was left with a dead system.
Arch is NOT for the beginner. Arch is (IMHO) [COLOR="Red"]the better distro around,[/COLOR] if you want to learn Linux, not if you need a quick-ready desktop...