If we go to Distrowatch we can find that there are hundreds of Linux distros listed there but at the end we can see that most of those Linux distros are more or less themed versions of three major Linux distributions i.e Arch, Debian and Fedora. Reviewing all of the distributions available on Distrowatch is not only time consuming but also irrelevant. Hence i will restrict myself with reviewing only the ones which i think are relevant.
Arch is a rolling-release Distro which means whenever a new version of a package is released Arch users get it through instant updates. In Arch Linux, there are lot of updates, updates everywhere! Arch users are the first ones to get latest software in Linux world, but they are also the first ones to encounter the bugs. One thing which comes to the mind of many users when they start to use Arch is that they should've listened to the memes.
Although in official repository, Arch has less packages availability than that of Debian. However to compensate that arch has its 'Arch User Repository' (AUR) where the arch users submit the software compiled by them. Personally I've found that every proprietary software which is made to work on Linux is available in AUR. This is a big selling point of Arch Linux, you don't have to go on different websites to download .deb and .rpm in order to install software on your machine. On Arch, for example if you want to install brave browser you just need to type
yay -S brave-bin and that's it Brave will be installed on your system. Contrary to that if you were using a Debian based distribution you would have to go through 3-4 step process to install brave!
Debian has three release models i.e Stable, Testing and Unstable. However according to Debian's website only stable is recommended for general use. Debian developers use Testing and Unstable as the testing ground for Stable. But still you can find many Debian Unstable users on internet who claim that their distro does not break. Debian has the highest number of packages in its repositories, more than double than that of Arch's but you won't be able to find those proprietary software in Debian's repository which are available in AUR. When used on workstations Debian Stable is criticised for having obsolete packages. It is understandable for Debian after one year of its release to have older packages but even the new release lags behind 5 months of development. It has its own use case, on server you don't usually want your disto to be a rolling-release, on servers debian comes to your help. But still there are lot of people who don't care what version number they are using. These people use Debian stable as their daily driver and are happy with it. I consider myself of this category however my love with Debian is only one sided, Debian refuses to boot on my hardware even though i used iso with non-free drivers.
I'm not sure about the release cycle of Fedora. It's not a complete rolling-release nor its a stable release. Some parts of Fedora gets all kind of updates on the other hand some just get security fixes. Although a new version of fedora comes every six months.
I've two major concerns about Fedora. First, it is usually the fist distro to adopt a new technology. Fedora was the first distro to use wayland. Now wayland has made the Linux experience much more smoother however when it first came, in its early stage, wayland was giving much problems. Too much ram usage, applications not supporting wayland were some of the many problems which were associated with wayland in its early stage and as Fedora was using wayland, all its users were suffering because of it. Wayland is only one example of many new technologies which were adopted by Fedora before anyone else did. As desktop users we must know that Fedora is a testing ground for red hat. Hence it is not the best thing to be used on personal computers.
Second, the package manager used by Fedora: DNF, it is slooooow! DNF automatically updates its repository everytime user wants to install a package. This sounds good on paper however the update of repository takes longer on fedora as compared to that of Debian. Which makes it troublesome to install or perform basic tasks with packages in Fedora terminal.
Ubuntu is the windows of Linux world. It is the most hated one. But still i think in consumer market Ubuntu has played the biggest role in the success of Linux. Linux would have only being using by nerds in their parent's basements if it was not for Ubuntu. On the surface you can say Ubuntu is based on Debian, but can you really recommend a new user to use Debian? That is the work done by Ubuntu devs to make 'Linux for humans'.
Yes there are some genuine concerns about ubuntu for example snaps etc. but hey, no one is forcing you to stick with ubuntu, now its no more 2010. Other distros have matured in providing a good consumer experience, just move to them if you don't like snaps and the direction in which ubuntu is moving.