Linux

I realized Arch was overrated when I got a brand new 7900 XT and it didn't work on Arch at all because their LLVM was a version behind. It was up-to-date on Fedora and even Ubuntu, but not Arch. Then there was the whole broken grub thing. Bleeding edge and unstable I get, but you can't be unstable and also behind. You can run Arch in any distro with distrobox, I don't see why you wouldn't just do that.

Ubuntu has ads in the terminal when you update. Runs a highly modified GNOME that doesn't play well with some extensions. Snaps by default (although maybe not that bad now that they seem to launch a bit quicker). Unfortunately so many things only have Ubuntu support if they have Linux support at all, it's such a shame.

Debian

NixOS for sure, it's poorly documented and even worse designed.

Seeing a lot of Manjaro here, what's the deal? I installed it just yesterday on a test machine to check it out as I plan on steering over from windows long-term so just browsing what's out there. Don't really have issues and it ticks the boxes of a more user-friendly installation and comes out of the box with Plasma. I may try out pure Arch or the GUI fork just not to have the hassle of setting up the DE

Debian Hurd

I've got to go with Endeavour. I'm not sure it's so much that it's overrated, but more that the community talks about it as a replacement for Manjaro which is far from the case. The installation may be easier than arch but once it's all up and running you're going to need to be comfortable in the terminal to sort things out. The documentation for endeavour is incredibly lacking too. It's an unnecessary middle step between a "beginner" distro and arch. If you can't follow the arch installation guide on the wiki then you're going to have even more trouble when it comes to endeavour

Pop_OS!

Manjaro

Ubuntu

Fedora

Linux Mint