Fedora was also the only thing that worked on my new laptop, because every other distro runs a super old kernel. I'm a super happy Fedora user :)
This is even still a thing based on Centos 7 and running gnome 2 not a gnome 2 derivative but actual gnome 2.
I agree what you say is presumably so however Ubuntu LTS/Debian or arch update cadence, pick one, are still better than updating every 6 months for most users. If I want really up to date software I would like to have it now not months from now. If I have to wait I would like actual stability.
Fedora is optimized for testing new tech to be rolled out by red hat not for usage by end users. As it stands you can benefit from the sweat of their brow while not actually using fedora by using something that actually is.
Also note that if you install software from additional repos updates between versions may not be as smooth between versions. If you don't package choice is certainly going to be substantially inferior compared to arch or ubuntu.
Depends on what you need. CentOS Stream is rolling release.
> Updates in place have historically been less than awesome and it adopts new tech before it is ready with no practical way to run either the old version of fedora or the old version of the software.
There's Modularity for different software versions.
Example rolling out pulseaudio when it didn't work well. One version I recall went from acceptable font rendering to can't stand to start at it levels of horribleness. The release of gnome 3.0 the release of KDE 4.0.