I find that Fedora generally just works, has a lot of very up to date packages and requires a lot less tweaking and setup work than something like Arch.

If you don't need cutting edge software packages and run older hardware, I've been very happy running Debian for a long time.

That hardly exists, there is always something on laptops that isn't supported, or needs a couple of late nights to properly configure.

The best Linux experience remains classical desktops.

Can't confirm for the last ~12 years, various laptops from Dell and Lenovo, lower and higher end, various distros ranging from Ubuntu to Fedora to VoidLinux to now Garuda (an Arch deriv), various DEs / WMs (Gnome, KDE, i3).

But then I never multi-monitor. But everything these laptops had, was working without a hitch.

Likewise I can't confirm, in the various laptops I have used since 1999, there was always something broken, between wireless, battery, finger printer reader, 3D, hardware video decoding, webcam.

Toshiba, Dell, IBM, Lenovo, Asus, HP.

My experience with a Framework Laptop has been that the one or two things that are relevant were quite well-documented, I'd guess because Framework actually cares about Linux and there's a lot of overlap between "folks who want what Framework offers" and "folks who want what Linux offers"

Fedora KDE is working well for me.

It should be noted that this is exactly what you get by default with Asahi Linux for new arm Macs