KDE Plasma has proven to be one of the most customizable desktop environments available. Theming is easily achievable with the versatility of QT, (which is technically on Hyprland but more versatile in a full QT desktop), as well as the versatility of panels that can be moved and modified to whatever you wish for them to be. External plugins or programs like Latte dock, or the Plutonium tile manager further expand on Plasma’s capabilities. Hyprland is also customizable, but almost only through external sources, making Plasma much more accessible and seamless. Of course there are reasons behind this, but each to their own. Feel free to state your own opinions communist@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz, but since this is an IMO post (basically opinion of the OP), I think we’d all appreciate it if you were more civilized and detailed as to why you felt the need to shoot down the OP. Also, maybe research your claims before commenting.

Well yes, but my point is that one can intuitively can use regular DE's and be productive, the same is not true for window managers. Regardles if one configures or not.

He means the best in desktop experience when it comes to desktops with the best adoptability.

Hyprland is a compositor, not a desktop environment.