Slow clap from Linux users everywhere. I think we are so jaded that some of us prefer the masses to remain ignorant to the fact of a more powerful, more stable and free OS. Things have become familiar this way.
I've used various versions of Linux and Windows, and in my experience Linux is great to use, until something breaks and you want to refresh that component. When I first started using it around 2005 it was network issues (luckily things are much improved now), when I use it now I most frequently have issues with sound. On the other hand, Windows might not be as nice a development environment, but at least you can rely on the drivers (for the most part).
In Linux, you will need to go through a lot of documentation and forum until you learn enough about the component to understand how to fix the issue.
This may seems a huge effort, but it is very rewarding: your problem is solved forever, you know what caused it, you have discovered many useful features of you OS that you did not know, you have learned how to analyse similar issues.
Linux is very stable: almost everything I have learned 20 years ago remain useful.
Skills with Linux tools help diagnose the issue, but they don't always point to an obvious solution. As I mentioned earlier, I often have issues with sound in Linux, especially when trying something beyond the stock configuration (e.g. JACK interfacing with PulseAudio and ALSA). The graphics stack in Linux is slowly improving, I don't see why the same can't be done for audio. RTFM shouldn't be a requirement for basic functionality (graphics, sound, input, networking).
I've used various Linux distos over the last 10+ years. If you use something like Slackware, it is rock solid. I still have some 5+ year old installs that simply just work. However, distributions that update/upgrade and install software automatically have lower stability as more people are involved in creating packages, and not of all of them are skilled or careful enough. Packages are often patched versions of vanilla software and sometimes the patch was just wrong because it does not sync well with some other installed software. I still recall major mess by Ubuntu and Fedora and their derivatives at many points in the past.
Each has its own pros and cons.
And yes, your comment sounds really condescending : "masses, ignorant".
The fact that some distros are great for most people out of the box is just an extra perk for me, it's not that important. I could never make Windows as good as I made my Debian, or Chrome as good as I made my Firefox.
Regarding your point on distros, I think it is, excuse me, a bit off : while you certainly are an advanced Linux user, you need to keep in mind most of the computer userbase will certainly not be as confident as you to install tricky packages in CLI .
The UI is there to ease your work, not to hinder you, especially when you are part of the 90% of users which consider a computer as nothing but a tool.