I'm creating my own desktop environment and deal with bugs here and there that I fix on my own since it's my own product. It's designed with my needs in mind created by someone who doesn't know what he's doing half the time.

There are absolutely awesome products like gnome and kde that just work. You can use them to get a stable environment that are designed to work in multitude of situations for general public. Windows never just works, you just learn to ignore its shortcomings. Like updating in the background even when you need the bandwidth, lack of central update station for your apps, dealing with lengthy custom install processes trying to impose bloatware you didn't ask for, uninstall processes begging you not to uninstall the sweet sweet spyware.

You just learn not to let these problems bother you. And that's not anything personal against you, it's just how a bad product with good marketing works. Linux is objectively better.

You may want a few products that are built for Windows and are not available on Linux and you wouldn't want to try an alternative that may even work better objectively and that is absolutely your choice and is respectable. You may not want to learn a new environment and stay in your safe zone and that's respectable. But you can't use your safe zone to decide what's better. A free product that provides better hardware support, faster communication bus, easier user experience with much faster bug fix and release cycle, tons and tons of choice is objectively better. You are free not to try it.