To be fair, I might have been that guy 10 years ago, and I was probably quite an annoying know it all co-worker then, but now, after close to 20 years in the industry, having worked in software that is used by millions, being a referenced author, honestly, no, I refuse outright to deal with bullshit like this. I don't expect everyone to think what I say is right (because it isn't) but to just dismiss it since it isn't THEIR answer, is a RED flag for me and I would prefer not to work there, no matter the offer.
I keep hearing about a shortage of quality talent in the industry. Given that, I would expect employers to pay particular attention to putting their best foot forward in interviews -- since interviews work in both directions.
One that fails to do so -- or whose best foot is off-putting -- is revealing that their attitude toward potential hires and/or their ability to offer a good working environment is poor.
People talk about how a bad hire is a significant cost for employers, but taking a bad job can be a much bigger cost for the employee than a single bad hire is for an employer, and quite worth avoiding.
"Best" (in doing interviews) is not a criterion that lies on an ordinal scale, but is a multicriterial property.
One could swap "a company" and "one engineer there" and still have a perfectly valid argument.
Obviously it's your prerogative to decide where to work. But walking away because you didn't like a single interview is a little bit petty.