I don't know who these people having issues are but I run Linux Mint Debian Edition and have no issues editing my stuff.

The only issue I can imagine is if they had formatted an external HDD with ext4 and and copied docs from a previous Linux install, and now when they copy it to their new install, they don't have permission to edit the doc.

For example, you try out Ubuntu for a few weeks/months. You format your ext HDD in ext4 and create docs in Ubuntu. You then copy those into the HDD. Or maybe you had another drive formatted with NTFS and copied docs from there onto the ext4 drive.

After a few weeks you erase Ubuntu from your machine and install Arch. Now when you try to edit a doc on the HDD or copy it to your machine, you find you don't have permission because those permissions were set on your previous Ubuntu install.

I've had permission issues with that hence I format my ex HDD with exFAT and it works perfectly. Also works perfectly with Windows and macOS as they can all read/write to exFAT without permission issues.

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

That's a tough one to answer, because Linux has one key element that is different from other OS : it isn't one single thing dumbed down to cater to everyone, instead it has multiple variations (distributions), each has their own logic and ideas, and everyone of them are highly customisable (so yeah you can spend a lot of time editing stuff if you want to). This means that it higly depends on what you chose to use, what you wanna do with it, and what are your skills.

I could say that you would get as much issues as you would with any other OS, but that would be wrong depending on the distribution you use, that would be wrong if you have a specific need that isn't easy to get on Linux or not yet troublefree to use, and that would be wrong if you have no idea what you are doing. You could even have less issues (but I wouldn't advertise that thought). This is why there are what people call "noob friendly distros", meaning as much troublefree as possible and easy to learn (doesn't mean it has all your needed features, or that it will grant you the best experience).

I have been toying with Linux since I was 15, but I only made the switch some years ago (I'm 29). Most of my issues were either that the distribution I used did'nt satsfy me, or that my needs were a bit complicated to get working, but once I found something that worked for me most of my experience has been «you configure it once and then you are good to go», I cannot say it is the same for everyone.

One important thing to note is that switching from a familiar OS to an unfamiliar one is never easy (people tend to forget how hard they had to learn using a pc), and it can get painfully hard to do if you go at it with the wrong mindset. So if you want to try it out, I'd suggest you first spend some time looking if everything you need will be available and easy to get working, then find a distribution that you think would suit you (since it's a first dive you might try something "noob friendly"). Ideally you would first look how it works before trying anything, for exemple don't be fooled thinking a distribution is only defined by how it looks, it's how it works that matters most. It's a bit like preparing yourself for a trip, never try it blindly (it's a common mistake people do when switching between OS, be it Linux or otherwise), it will require patience and an open mind because you will have to learn how thing works since it's new to you and it might feel like nothing is working the way it should, so it's better if you can still go back to an OS that is familiar to you if something goes wrong. And then you'll see for yourself if it is a troublefree experience or a masochist one :p

Make it an alternative OS before erasing your existing OS so you can switch back and forth and use the old one to research when something unexpected happens on your new one. This way you can transition slowly. Expect there to be challenges, but also expect to learn a lot. It's a fantastic platform.

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

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

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.