FreeBSD has supported Gnome for years for example. Wifi drivers are not Linux-only either AFAIK they just take time to get ported from Linux (or sometimes NetBSD) to FreeBSD.
While it's true that FreeBSD isn't as easy a desktop system as Ubuntu is, it sounds like some (but definitely not all) of your reasons are a few years out of date.
FreeBSD's main focus is servers also to be fair.
Sadly, in relation to AMD GPUs:
<https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=257810#c5>
>> … disable dri 3 in xorg.conf (use dri 2)
Probably best to not try to make BSD into modern Linux which is basically FreeWindows. I wouldn't want to use a BSD that BSD people like any more than they'd want to switch to Linux, it seems they are different for a reason.
airyxOS, based on FreeBSD, aims to provide "… the finesse of macOS with the freedom of FreeBSD. …".
I wish well to projects such as this, however I rarely engage – testing and feedback – because the focus on Apple keyboards is too much for me.
(I taught myself to use the keyboard in a very different way when I switched away from Apple after twenty-something years. I don't intend to un-learn that switch.)
There are lots of servers running Linux that could very well be switched to FreeBSD, and lots more that are locked into Linux due to the state of hardware drivers or the containers they're running.
If all you're doing on Linux is browsing the web and opening terminals, you could probably switch to FreeBSD without too much disruption.
I am not particularly interested in the above, except power management and wifi. I am trying GhostBSD as an alternative specifically because I am not interested in Gnome, Wayland, or Steam. I don't hate them, just don't care. I may go simpler and just use CTWM and cobble together a desktop environment.
I am genuinely curious what running these things on a BSD gets you that you can't get with Linux. Using a mainstream distro (like Debian or Fedora) gets you this without hassle.
The question rather is... why would anyone want to run linux when *BSD (and illumos) are available?
What does the user get out of running a BSD for Linux software that they can't get out of Linux? If you prefer BSD, then why not use software that is better tailored for BSD rather than software that requires porting and changing or removing all of the Linux specific bits?
Edit: wayland not waylaid. That was genuinely autocorrect but it made me smile.
From the quote at <https://forums.freebsd.org/posts/548305>:
>> … KDE Plasma Wayland, which was working in September, is now broken. It’s not just my laptop, it’s on my workstation (AMDGPU), on the spare machine (Intel iGPU) and the laptop (Intel iGPU). I have chatted a bit with Plasma developers, but the debugging is on me, unfortunately.
If you _do_ find Wayland working for KDE Plasma e.g. the option in SDDM, please join the discussion at <https://forums.freebsd.org/threads/kde-wayland.80167/> – thanks.
Even with powerd and speedstep support enabled, the fans were spinning close to full speed at idle. It sounded like an airplane taking off. I searched around and found that maybe I needed to get specific software from HP that was behind a paywall. So I gave up.
Instead I installed Alpine Linux (so tiny) on the server and its never been quieter; With zero extra config. I ended up playing with LXD instead of Jails.
Desktop BSD works. It's a pain to set up but you can get there.