Release date
First, explaining my context: I'd rather handle updates gradually, with an option to back out, and only break a few things, than to have a large number of sudden changes to a system. This is the principle of gradualism. Tracking Debian 'unstable' gives you this. The downside: you're getting raw packages. The upside: the updates are in small (albeit frequent) increments. Most of the bugs get worked out, quickly.
The benefit transfers over to 'stable' users, even though, as you suggest, updates tend to be more "big bang". Though on the Big Day, a Debian user will be upgrading a large number of packages, these are packages which have gone through the incremental update process described above, and whose troubleshooting record is generally quite good -- there are generally few major bugs on an initial Debian release, rather markedly unlike the RPM-based distros.
Regarding LJ's [link|http://www2.linuxjournal.com/lj-issues/issue91/5441.html|Reader's Choice Awards], Debian's climbed from fourth place to second. Not bad for a distribution that competes only on technical merits and features, not marketing.
Envy, me? No.
...but you're a bit defensive there, Addy.
