Your software packages are old (on top of being how far behind Loonix runs behind proprietary to begin with). Hardware compatibility sucks because of 'old kernel'. Software support is lacking and sometimes needs PPAs or 'personal package archives'. -And there are security risks with using these outdated packages and kernels.
Even an idiot can see you're recommending a distro based on a server distro that's based on a server distro (and surmise there'd be problems with that). Mint can't even focus on one distro but wastes resources on a Debian version (server distro), and a desktop environment (the only one I rage quit after a half hour). So, Mint adds to the problem of GNU/Linux and the choices with not only 2 redundant versions of itself, but a DE no one needed or asked for.
Is it really easy? In Arch, you have the AUR which eliminates the need for snaps, appimages, flatpaks, building from source, and their inherent issues (including security issues with flatpaks). You'd also get a wiki that explains almost everything.
Some dumb Loonix YouTuber told his followers that they need to stop confusing noobs with many different distros. He suggested to pick one and go with that. -He picked Mint and not for any particular reason. -This YouTuber also told us that 'Linux is Linux' and distro didn't matter. (You're following the advice of an idiot).
