Reminded that Debian-family is outdated linux that uses the marketing 'stable' which has 0 relations to the number of bugs.
Modern Linux like Fedora has those bugs already fixed.
I say this as a warning. I thought we were trapped with Windows 11 and 'Linux'(meaning Debian-family). No, turns out that is outdated linux and Modern linux is amazing.
I'm a bit reluctant to lump Fedora in with 'Linux', because its not fair to Fedora.
Correct: It is stable, which is to say that things that work today will work tomorrow and the system does its best to stay out of your way. It doesn't, say, expect you to jump major versions every 6 months like other distros you might name.
> I thought we were trapped with Windows 11 and 'Linux'(meaning Debian-family).
I mean, yeah, the family of Linux distros alone is huge; conflating "Linux" and "Debian-family" is a significant mistake.
> No, turns out that is outdated linux and Modern linux is amazing.
And less-bleeding-edge Linux is also amazing. Unless you need the new stuff, moving at a slightly more sedate pace is perfectly fine. Which way the tradeoffs go depends on you and your usecases; some people want all the new shiny features right right now and benefit from riding the bleeding edge (like Debian Sid, Arch, or yes Fedora), and some people want to set things up and then not have to think about that machine for another few years (funny enough, I'd actually prefer that Debian supported each release for an even longer time, but that takes resources the project doesn't have). Bashing either approach is myopic.
If you are running a mission critical service, oh say for example wide-area emergency services dispatch, the downside is people might die and you will look like a dickhead for insisting on living on the bleeding edge.