That's great that you have, but I assure you, there are a GREAT MANY more who it has not turned out that way for, here alone, over the last 12 months or so. So I agree, the BIOS updates have helped a great deal, but there are still issues that remain in some cases on some systems and especially on early BIOS versions.
AMD has said themselves that there are IMC issues, which is EXACTLY WHY they have a well advertised AMD approved memory list for Ryzen. SO yeah, it's been neither overblown nor completely fixed. It has however, greatly improved.
Mostly due to newer chipsets, newer CPU models and BIOS updates, but not everybody has the luxury or willingness to do what needs to be done, and in some cases it doesn't even matter if they can't POST, they can't update the BIOS anyhow. Hardly see that now, but still see it here and there.
It's currently a $60 difference at Micro Center and has been for months. A 2600 comes with a stealth cooler rather than the much better wraith cooler like the 1600 does. Which means if you can type 2 numbers into the bios the 1600 is equal if not better on stock coolers. Even if it's only a $26.50 difference it's still not any better without spending another $30 or more on a good cooler. Not that it really makes a difference with a 1050 ti/ rx 480 anyway.
That, is the biggest crock of (insert word of your choosing here) I've heard, at least today.
You don't need a different cooler to make the 2600 worthwhile over the 1600. Sure, if you WANT the Wraith or Spire rather than the Stealth, then it's going to cost more, but it's not essential in any case. Not for stock operations.
Not sure what your specific issue is with others being in favor of second Gen Ryzen over first Gen, but there are distinct advantages aside from anything that has to do with manual overclocking. Stock for stock, they are better processors. Period. I don't care if you've assemble four hundred Ryzen systems recently, it doesn't change that fact.
It may only be a few FPS (But in some titles as much as 18-20fps)
https://www.techspot.com/review/1614-ryzen-2600/page3.html
or a few seconds difference in productivity benchmarks (But in some applications as much as 14 or more seconds per operation)
https://www.techspot.com/review/1614-ryzen-2600/page2.html
but the difference in performance exists and is measurable. People spend a LOT more than 26 bucks trying to gain an additional 18-20fps on upgrades, all the time, so the minor premium doesn't seem very extravagant to me.
And as far as the price, the 1600 is currently 118.89 at Outlet PC.
https://www.outletpc.com/ay9499-amd-ryzen-5-1600-6core-32-ghz-36-ghz-turbo-socket.html?utm_source=ay9499-amd-ryzen-5-1600-6core-32-ghz-36-ghz-turbo-socket&utm_medium=shopping+engine&utm_campaign=pcpartpicker&utm_content=AMD+-+CPUs (Processors) > AMD AM4+&sscid=51k3_hslvu
And it's 149.89 there as well.
https://www.outletpc.com/za0071-amd-ryzen-5-2600-6-core-yd2600bbafbox-processor.html?utm_source=za0071-amd-ryzen-5-2600-6-core-yd2600bbafbox-processor&utm_medium=shopping+engine&utm_campaign=pcpartpicker&utm_content=AMD+-+CPUs (Processors) > AMD AM4+&sscid=51k3_hsmkg
So that's a 31 dollar difference. Yesterday it was 26 bucks. Tomorrow it might be 14. Who knows.
BTW, IE is a memory engineer. He's forgotten more about memory and memory configurations than you or I will EVER know. I wouldn't go there unless you want to be seriously shamed by your (Our) lack of knowledge in that area. I'm fairly well versed compared to the average enthusiast, but it's not even a fair competition against him. I'd bow out early if it were me.