Not the same guy

And I’m not saying any of these are worthy of going Fedora proper vs Nobara… that’s going to be a personal call for each person I think. I think they’re both good but here are some differences I’ve noticed (not a complete list by any means):

• Nobara updates are a bit behind Fedora’s.
• Nobara switched away from Fedora’s Anaconda installer to Calamares. For many, this is probably a welcome change. For me, it very much was NOT bc Calamares, despite possibly being more intuitive for some, currently does not support all of the same functionality that Anaconda does. For instance, I prefer the Fedora style FDE partitioning scheme (ESP partition + unencrypted ext4 /boot partition + LUKS version 2 volume with /) as well as putting my installs in custom BTRFS subvol’s… Neither of which was supported by Calamares as of 6 months ago when I last checked. Talking about graphical options only for both installers, though if someone knows how to specify it anyway from Calamares, I would be interested.
• Nobara switched to AppArmor recently. For most, this is probably easier than SELinux. And I think it is great that AppArmor is being supported in Nobara. TBH, I wish it were an option in Fedora too despite the fact that I personally would likely continue to use SELinux - but I am just generally in favor of more options.
• Nobara pushes Wayland a lot more than Fedora does. Sure, it is the default in Fedora Workstation (as well as the KDE spin). But if you are in one of those use-cases that isn’t quite ready yet (typically people who either prefer a certain desktop like Cinnamon/Mate, have nvidia cards, and/or have some need for certain x11 windowing tools that don’t have mature replacements yet), then Nobara might be a tougher jump at present