I would argue that the average user does not care about the errors that happen in scenarios that aren't handled. They can be distracting and disconcerting for a user trying to get his/her work done and an automation error does not necessarily mean that the automation has stopped working. It might cause a lack of confidence by the user to use the solution as well in some cases. Displaying a more user friendly message is completely understandable strategy though but generally the errors produced make no sense to someone who isn't familiar with the product. 

SuppressErrors is simply a safe-guard for anything you don't handle. Try-Catch's are the recommended best practices to surround automations that could fail and including descriptive messages logged out to the log. 

Suppress Errors only suppresses the ugly error message that happens when you don't handle an exception.  If you use Try..Catch appropriately this should be a rare occurrence. 

Unless I'm mistaken, Suppress Errors basically ignores exceptions and carries on with the execution.  We therefore need to make sure those are catched in a Try..Catch or it might lead to the automation reaching completion in a broken kind of way.  Is that a valid statement?

Thanks