I don’t usually like to do a me-too post, but mizmo is right on again with her thoughts on jcm’s post. I raised a similar question at a town hall meeting earlier this year – basically, asking if Fedora is really suitable for day-to-day use as a primary desktop. My personal situation is much like some of those who answered, that it works for me but that I would find it difficult to recommend. There was one part of someone’s answer which particular rang true for me, which just happened be to be mizmo’s (how convenient!):
This is absolutely key. Fedora has to have a role, and I think to often the “ isn’t stable” and “stuff is breaking” arguments get batted away with “This isn’t RHEL/CentOS”. Without being strongly usable for something, fewer people will be tempted to use it.
So I would like to make my technical feature plea, along similar lines to the comments about updates. Right now, Fedora revs extremely often, and isn’t supported for long. Yet, the major version upgrade story is really pretty sorry – even with preupgrade. It’s not straightforward to upgrade to a new version and quite often packages will break.
If we’re keeping up this pace, I think it should be much more incumbent on Fedora as a whole to make major version upgrades clean and easy. Packagers should be testing this constantly. I saw figures recently about versions of Fedora being pulled by yum updates, and it didn’t look pretty reading. If Fedora is about being “First” we have to bring users with us.