Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unfortunately each has its own drawbacks and, in typical Linux Desktop fashion, it's 3 fragmented solutions to roughly the same problem with none of them being standard or enjoying a particularly de-facto status. The end result being that you can't get everything in any one of them, and often can't get a particular application in any of them.
As someone who's released commercial software on linux before - having only 3 solutions to target is actually pretty delightful (We still build .deb and .rpm as well, so 5 really, after snap, flatpak and appimage) Plus I find the general sandbox approach to be a LOT more stable - distro upgrades rarely causes issues, and dependencies are much easier to wrangle. Definitely still some hiccups, but overall it feels like…
I think that speaks to a particularly huge failure of Linux Desktop more than anything else.