I've seen a lot of people who quite dislike Manjaro, and I'm not really sure why. I'm myself am not a Manjaro user, but I did use it for quite a while and enjoyed my experienced, as it felt almost ready out of the box. I'm not here to judge, just wanted to hear the opinion of the community on the matter. Thanks!
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
It all depends, it's not just the installer which makes it different than Arch, also the configurations (on Arch/Artix for many things to work, or safe configs, you actually need to do a lot of tweaks, whereas I understand Manjaro should work mostly out of the box with sane configs that should work in most regular users). As someone mentioned, for people not used to dealing with configurations, starting their experience with gnu+linux, perhaps Manjaro is the option, and then they can explore Arch/Artix.