I switched from Windows to Ubuntu back in the late aughts. I switched to Mint in the mid teens. I've been running four monitors on Mint for several years now. It's backed up my requirement that "it just works" quite well. I don't need an absolutely perfect interface; I need one that is good enough. Mint more than satisfies that requirement. Mint also satisfies my many other requirements, mainly in using the computer as a way to perform certain tasks (working with software defined radios, learning C and C++ programming, putting together very basic web pages, researching family history). Windows has decided it knows what I need better than I do, and I cannot abide by that. I paid for this computer, so I'll decide which browser I use, thank you very much.
That is not to say that I wouldn't switch to something else. For a short time, I was having very serious difficulties with Mint. I was in the process of finding a replacement when I discovered the actual problem. Come to find out, it wasn't Mint at all; my motherboard had developed a fault in the connection to a stick of memory. Once I fixed that (by building a new computer), Mint has been rock-solid ever since. But if I discovered there was something in Mint that kept me from performing some of my basic requirements, then I would switch. The OS is a requirement for my tasks, not the other way around.
I will add this one, last tidbit based on all of the discussions above: I've run some of the Phoronix GPU tests on my new computer, which is dual boot between Mint (my normal OS) and Windows (needed for certain tasks). Mint beat Windows on every GPU test I ran. That could be chalked up to the specifics of my system (I have just the right motherboard and video card, the version of Windows is 11, etc), but I was actually surprised. I'd always thought games were written for Windows not just because Windows is the dominant OS, but because Windows does video better.