I believe that spending 15mins on the arch forums or IRC would probably result in somebody helping you out with the right pacman incantation. YMMV, my personal experience.
On a tangent, I would love to hear more about any Debian stable users out there and their experience with the conservative approach to updating. I am particularly fond of this Debian wiki article on DontBreakDebian: https://wiki.debian.org/DontBreakDebian
This is definitely a distro for people who want to get involved in the sysadmin part of it. A distro like Fedora will have a new release every 6 months and each release and ~390 days of support. You aren't expect to do manual intervention, just let it update itself upon reboot/poweroff from times to times and do a major upgrade, every 6 months to 1 year. Debian has 2y releases cycles and +- 3y of support, in the ubuntu world it is like Fedora or LTS (5y of support). If you want the longest extended lifecycle, RHEL and its clones have pretty much 10years of support without any fuss. Add to that the immutable distros like Fedora Silverblue, OpenSUSE MicroOS and some others where it is virtually impossible to make it shit the bed, even while being stupid.
So in the linux world you can definitely choose your poison, from the less eventful one to the one needing more attention. It looks like you didn't choose wisely. If I had to setup a distro for the least knowledgeable people, I would set it up with an RHEL or Almalinux and install a more modern browser through Flatpak. As long as the hardware is supported from day 1 they would expect a desktop that do not change at all for 10years.
I'm not happy about "Apple Silicon", it does feel restrictive and often times the only way to get around it is to use licensed VMs, which feels like a bit of a rip off. At the same time, my laptop runs phenomenally well, does everything I need it to do, and it never dies or gets overheated under normal use. I can't really complain.