Debian is for people who want to configure a server once and have it stay running and secure.
"Stability" in Debian's context means _version_ stability, not that it doesn't crash. I think most Linux distros aim to not crash.
Indeed, I moved to Fedora and I haven't looked back.
I was already using RHEL and CentOS (later Rocky Linux) on servers, I guess it's bye-bye time for Debian.
> Debian is for people who want to configure a server once and have it stay running and secure.
The same could be said for RHEL and most of its derivatives though.
That's not a problem with debian, that's just a mismatch in needs, you're probably better off with a "less" stable operating system.
I'll be honest, i haven't had any stability issues with Fedora either, and i've been upgrading as often as i would with Debian. And in both cases, i'm using fairly old and known hardware (years old thinkpads, the T440 and the X270).
Many times I’ve add to add external/weird repositories to get some functionalities i rrallneeded (eg: appropriate codecs fir bluetooth audio and a version of bluez that supported by bluetooth headsets) and that kind of tainting really endangers the longevity of a debian-based system.
I understand that the fault is completely on the external repositories and on the user… however the choice then is to be able to use my hardware (or, in general, to the kind if computing i need) or not.
These days I’m using fedora btw, which has been really stable while providing fairly up-to-date packages.