Re: okay...
Let's just take some time to think out the multiple desktop choice thing in Linux. Simple guide:
Some folk prefer a smartphone style approach - nothing but apps on the desktop. For them Ubuntu's Unity fits the bill. No need to hop once they've settled on it.
Some folk prefer a minimalist, clear desktop approach. For them Gnome fits the bill. No need to hop once they've settled on it.
Some folk prefer a maximalist approach - anything you like on the desktop, apps and data. For them KDE fits the bill. No need to hop once they've settled on it.
Some people prefer just data files on the desktop. There doesn't seem to be anything that actually enforces this but KDE is OK - you don't have to put anything there if you don't want to. Again no need to hop once they've settled on it.
The one really disruptive event took place a few years ago when Gnome grew a hair shirt and took a really minimalist turn. Mate and Cinnamon arose from projects to resurrect the previous Gnome (Mate) and reimplement it with the new Gnome underpinnings (Cinnamon). Those and XFCE sit around somewhere in the middle. They all have their adherents, as do Enlightenment and again, once they've settled there's no need to change.
Basically, to mix metaphors, it's horses for courses and no need to change horses in mid-stream. Unless, of course, changing horses out of curiosity is something you want to do; there's no accounting for folks which probably must also explain why so many people complain bitterly about Windows but simply put up with whatever Microsoft deigns to shovel out month by month and half-year by half year.
It's choice, If you don't relish the thought that you can choose the desktop approach that most suits you, maybe you're suffering from Stockholm syndrome.
FWIW SWMBO has a mixture of files* and apps (just Seamonkey and Zoom) on KDE whilst I also use KDE but with only files* on the desktop with most used applications on the panel (task bar in Windows parlance).
* In reality files and folders.