Linux

Older software is the most noticeable thing. Enterprise does not mean it is better - just that it is supported for a long time and they do that by not changing much on them. They are more designed for servers rather than workstations and generally not a great experiences unless you are running hundreds or thousands of them in an enterprise situation.

Professional just means payed for. What you are paying for is support in managing the systems, not a great user experience.

For home desktops it is far nicer to be on newer software rather than things that came out 5 to 10 years ago.

Yes, Debian.

If you're looking for something like this, but not paid for, try Debian stable. Same idea but free. Ubuntu also have an LTS version and I'm sure others.

The "Enterprise" in the title just means "support", which is a check box for a lot of organisations. Not so much home users.

Not worth it imo. You'll end up installing everything you use regularly from 3rd party repos (or building yourself) to get up to date features. Just use Fedora.

I manage a number of RHEL/Rocky and Ubuntu machines for work. EL is fine as a server distro but it doesn't make a great desktop distro. The packages are old and I've found it to be missing a number of packages I use on a desktop system. For a desktop, Fedora or Ubuntu is a better fit.

Try it out maybe? You're not buying a car... There's not much point going around and asking if you spend 20 mins trying it out and realise you don't want to use a 5 year old DE.

Basically expect the system will change only when you update to a new version, and that you'll need to use external PMs like flatpak or nix for all user packages if you plan on doing anything more advanced than browsing and office work.

I have some RHEL machines at work. They are used as VM hosts for windows VMs (CAD software). I set them up, but I also have a huge list of other apps and servers that I manage,develop and support, and so the person that wanted these mahines wanted professional services as an option if I am out or busy with other projects. Plus it allows us to offload liability for security if need be, whereas when I do it, there is anyone else to blame, legally speaking. ( Although so far we have not had a breach on my watch knocks on wood )

I just use fedora at home, I find the they are about the same and I personally wouldn't pay for the additional services. The package manager is different, but that's about it.

More than a decade ago I bought SUSE enterprise for a couple of years just to support the project. Never needed any assistance so I'm not sure about a different experience. BTW The box was nice 🤣

We use Alma Linux at work and it's fine, I suppose. I see two main reasons why you'd choose an EL linux distro:

1. You have (professional) software that officially supports it. RHEL's release model makes it an attractive target for proprietary software and many vendors choose to support it.
2. You need/want very long support cycles. You can run 10-year-old software even though you probably shouldn't.

Apart from those, it's a competent distro, Red Hat know what they're doing. If you want the equivalent to an Ubuntu LTS / Debian in the Fedora world, it get's the job done. I quite like their approach of keeping the core OS stable while updating drivers, tools, and compilers (e.g., the kernel version number has very little meaning in RHEL).

Is the experience very different from Fedora?

Yes. the age of the core packages is very noticeable. The number of fully supported packages is also very small and you need to go to EPEL very quickly (at which point you're no longer getting enterprise support...). On the plus side, it's much more stable than Fedora in my experience.

Edit: My main recommendation for a stable distro would probably be Debian unless one of the above points applies.

I think it depends on your use case. For my gaming desktop I use Fedora to get the latest packages. For professional scenarios I've been using Almalinux the past couple of years. It started life as a RHEL clone, but since RHEL changed their code distribution rules I see them more parallel in the stream rather than down. It's completely free, but there are options to purchase support and live kernel patching if required.

If you want to go the Suse route, Opensuse Leap will give you the closest experience to Suse enterprise. I believe Suse actually offers conversion tools to convert Leap to the full enterprise OS. I don't have personal experience with it, but have considered it in the past and this is the information I recall.

Personally using rocky Linux. Which is essentially free rhel. It moves slower then fedora.

RHEL comes with very limited repos, so this might help: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/epel/

So Technically No. Our proprietary CAD was only supported and certified to work on RHEL or SUSE. I wanted to test before commiting to a distro. So I went with OpenSUSE leap since it shares SUSE binaries and has same release and service cycle. It installed and functions well on OoenSUSE While not identical to SUSE, I can say all the complaints I saw online of things not working in Linux were working for me. They sort of have to on a paid distro with support, so it seems to carry to OpenSUSE with the same binaries

1. nVidia hosts a repo specifically for SUSE and OpenSUSE ( probably RHEL too) it meany adding that nvdia url and updating in Yast2 GUI. Everything works, no tearing, no glitches, nVidia app for thermal settings or tweaking.

2)btrfs works. I saw lots of complaints of people saying btrfs filled their drive, etc. SUSE / OpenSUSE as jobs establishes to monitor number and age of snapshots and remove automatically as needed as well as cleaning tools. It all runs behind the scenes.

3. patches, people complain they don't know if a CVE affects them, if they have applied a patch or not, what package etc. On SUSE/OoenSUSE you have several patch, patches, lp commands that show you what has been released, what level and whether your system has it installed, not required, critical etc. Keeping up with CVE and patches is easy.

I assume RHEL will also have these types of perks to make some aspects easier

Much more stable but much, much older packages at some point. Can you tolerate that?

It is a lot easier these days as Distrobox and Flatpak offer great escape hatches to get newer software when you really need it.

Some of us fiddle with the base OS more than we should. In many ways, I think using something that changes less often is a great idea.

One great thing about RHEL is the documentation. First Red Hat themselves make great stuff. Then there are mountains of third-party materials. Finally, since it changes slowly, whatever issues you are facing have probably been seen before by others and what you find about it on the Internet will still apply.

i suspect that the biggest reason to use an enterprise distribution is the support since it helps shield you from the consequences of interoperability that naturally come out of the whole linux ecosystem of the right hand not knowing what the left had is doing.

I tried a couple of times but prefer fedora over redhat on lab servers and desktops. Fedora is easier to upgrade between releases and you get features faster and it's just as stable. The only time I use enterprise oses in my lab is for things that are picky about the os they run on