I think I may just be more comfortable with Arch at this point. I loved Slackware and if I was to pick another distro it would probably be Slack (or Crunchbang although I haven't tried it. Might test it out today
)
I think pacman compares with apt-get although I just found it easier to edit/update the mirrorlists for pacman and customize its functionality. With RPM-based distros I always found it less convenient to have separate programs for managing packages (rpm) and installing new packages (yum or yast) versus a pacman or apt-get where it is all in one.
I think for those control-freaks in all of us I just like that Arch comes out of the box with the minimal requirements for a working system. If I'm going to be using one GUI I don't need/want 5 different DMs on my machine and there is no "standard" setup so you can literally just install the packages you need with less chance of conflicts down the line.
@
Luis Pena does highlight the drawbacks though. You do have to diligently keep an Arch system up to date, although I've only had one update issue in my years using Arch which forced me to downgrade the kernel from cache, but even that was fixed with a couple commands (once I knew what I was doing heh)