Linux has distributions. Think of it as windows preconfigured for different target groups or by different groups. They all have different goals and ideals. There are stable distributions like Debian and distros built on top of that or unstable ones like Arch and Gentoo + all the distros built on top of that.

Each have trade offs. Many stable distributions don't get all the newest software or features because in order to be stable, everything has to be tested. (No software is bug free anybody who tells you otherwise doesn't know what they're talking about). Some stable distributions do have new software and features but are very difficult to configure or set up.
There are unstable distributions that get "bleeding edge" software and features, meaning as soon as they are released they are available very quickly thereafter. Things are bound to go wrong more often here and the system can break in unexpected ways that require more knowledge to fix.

If you want a stable system, don't use an unstable distro unless you know what you're doing.

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

It's better than it was, but still not as user-friendly as Windows or macOS.

Is it not stable?

Can you not set it up and then not have ongoing issues?

You are going to get gaslit to hell about this on lemmy. But no. It is not stable in the sense you mean.

The effort is worth it though.