Reading Doron's post today reminded me it's a good time to write a closure to my experience as told here and here. Since I both agree and disagree with Doron, I'll write the closure with references to his post.
Being a Linux veteran teaches me it's really not important which modern Linux distro to use. I should be above that. I reached to exactly the same conclusion as Doron yesterday, after I gave up of trying Fedora 10. So I started downloading the latest Ubuntu 8.10 64bit (I prefer to upgrade offline, and I might use it on several machines) alternative CD. Using Ubuntu again reminds me that I actually like it. It's snappy, looks good (espacially with my modifications) and simply works.
Compiling Fedora's and openSUSE's kernels reminded me this is quite useless (or not needed) these days, although it can be done quite easily. Never saw any recommendation for not doing this, only warnings to do this for the right reasons.
So having the latest OpenOffice.org or Firefox beta (or anything else to make the system less stable) is no excuse to switch a distro, as the distro is merely a base for further modifications and customizations. Choosing the distro to start with is important, but once there, it is needless to switch from one to another.
Having said that, I still hold the opinion that I would not self-customize the Debian used in our production servers. The price of breaking the compatibility is simply too great. In this field, Linux is just like the other server software - you don't modify it frequently or without a good reason (otherwise, the QA folks would have to work lots of extras).
But in my own computer/workstation... welcome back Ubuntu. And thanks to Adir which told me that the upgrade to 8.10 went smoothly on his laptop, and that not only it performs snappier, but the system is more stable.