I've been an Ubuntu user for ages, any reasons to switch to Fedora?
Fedora is a "makers" distro. Every big innovation in Linux has happened in Fedora first.
But whether it’s a good enough reason to switch an existing system depends on how much trouble one is having with these issues in their current system.
Snap is not discrete in any sense of the word.
Chromium is a snap in Ubuntu now for a while, even if you install it with apt it just installs the snap.
Canonical wants to deliver the entire OS via snap in the future, and is already partially there on the server with Ubuntu Core and they recently announced an Ubuntu Core Desktop is coming soon.
Where dnf shines compared to apt is discoverability. The help is decent. There's no separate apt-cache, and there are few reasons to use rpm directly.
Dnf also offers a plug-and-play installation of debugging symbols via `dnf debuginfo-install`, which have always been a pain for me.
Oh, and `dnf install pkg-config(package)` is nice too.
This is partly true, and partly not.
DNF always updates the local copy of the metadata, so it's more like "apt update && apt upgrade" than just "apt upgrade". I don't recall if Ubuntu has a background task for this, but that might be one reason it's "faster".
DNF also has more metadata to download, and the default parallelism is not very high. If you increase the setting, it gets a lot faster.
And also, DNF records the package update history, so that the origin of every package on the system (whether it was requested installed by a user, or indirectly as a dependency, whether it came from a repo or was side-installed) is auditable. Transactions are recorded and can be viewed and rolled back afterwards. And it uses a more rigorous SAT-solver based approach to dependency solving than apt uses. So it's likely doing more actual work rather than being slower at doing the same thing. Those features can be quite useful.
That's because is the beta version of RedHat. I wouldn't call SystemD and Pulseaudio innovations but ymmv.
More up to date and more vanilla Gnome means that you've got the best state of Wayland implementation, and therefore the best version of multi-monitor, HighDPi etc. (I don't know what Ubuntu is like here though at the moment).
That can also be a downside though, if you're using proprietary hardware drivers.
No "snap" pollution in the home directory.
Package naming conventions are better, IMO (this is a small thing to be fair, normally you'd just do a search, but the names are much more consistent and guessable on Fedora/Red Hat based distros in my experience)
If you are satisfied with Ubuntu and it's meeting your needs, then I would argue there is not enough in Fedora to warrant switching. This isn't to say there's lots of things to like, just that my tolerance for disruption is pretty low.
We use RHEL/rpm-based linuxes at work, and it helps to have a package building environment at home the same as it is at work. Everything else is or can be configured to be the same, for the most part.
But overall, they are really similar.