> Linux frequently demands that I spend hours chasing down issues

This is one of the points where people have vastly different experiences. I'm one of those that has fewer issues with Linux, and I definitely don't spend hours fixing problems. And this despite the fact that I use Arch, which is supposed to be an unstable distro. Why is that different users report so different experiences I don't know. I think that this might be partly due to perception: we tend to forgive more the OS we like. But your case doesn't seem to be just about perception. So I wonder how much the hardware could play a role here. I think Linux has quite good hardware support nowadays, but maybe I was just lucky so far.

No, it has to do with how your system is set up. Without fail, someone who has his opinion about Linux is using some ungodly bloated corpse of a distro because they genuinely do not know better. Hence why they blame their system's problems on the kernel, despite ostensibly never having any actual problems with the kernel itself. It's not like Linux is particularly perfect, but how many complaints about using it as the basis of a desktop system include the mistake that is the devtree? Or the fact that nice values are complete placebo? Or the million quirks with it's specific implementation of SIGALRM?

You don't have problems with Arch presumably because you've avoided building your system into a neutron star of corporate shitware, while that's the default state for most distributions.