If you are using Ubuntu and disabling snaps, might as well use something else. Snaps are basically the selling point of Ubuntu and any other distro based on it will provide a better experience if you don't want them.
their power management is better than any other distro for laptops.
Their compatibility with WiFi drivers is better than many others, granted that's not exclusive to ubuntu but it is a pro.
theyre more up to date than debian but stable while actually coming with Wayland support unlike Mint. Timeshift is great tho, good thing it's compatible with ubuntu.
their community is much larger than many other distro so support is easier to find.
it's just not a bad distro. There's not a lot of other distros that match its out-of-the-box experience.
Other distros are good. PopOS is good. I chose Ubuntu mostly because it's solid and stable but also because it has a wide community for help. I'm just getting tired of the narrative that ubuntu is totally crippled by its snaps. This is a linux distro, if I don't like something I get to change it, which is actually cool. This isn't windows where I have no control. Also, with snaps gone, I've literally never had a problem I haven't caused.
I have the approach of strip out what I don't want. Arch users install what they do want. At the end of the day, we both are exploiting software we want to use to be productive. If I found myself fighting the os (like Mac or Windows) I'd switch but I don't so I won't.
Because snaps aren't the only feature the distro comes with. It's widely versatile, commonly used, and this argument isn't a good one. PopOS is good, so is ubuntu minus the snaps.
That sentence should probably read "on my first day of using Linux outside of a vm on bare metal with an installation I intended to keep". I use Kali for security work and I used Manjaro once but it killed itself before I knew what I was doing.
Snaps are not very space efficient, I don't need the same packages installed multiple times. In a desktop use case that's a lot of repeating packages.