I guess I'm using it differently, because I don't find those issues so important for me. I'm using desktops as a different computers for different states of mind. One desktop has some relaxing read (hacker news, for example, or reddit), some explorers, notepads with not so important stuff. 1-2 desktops for work projects, usually it's exactly one desktop. One desktop for gaming and related websites, discord, etc. I'm switching between them may be one or two times a day. I can see that if you're using multiple desktops for a single project, something like multiple displays and often switching between them, they might be not that usable.

macOS implementation was bad, because I accidentally switched between desktops all the time. It shows all launched apps in the dock from all desktops. If I'm working on my project, I don't want to see that I have Battle.net client launched and 10 unread notifications in Discord guild channel. If I'm clicking on Safari icon, I want to launch new window on current desktop, I don't want to switch to another desktop with some random website.

Anyway the main point of virtual desktops is that they are implemented at OS level. Actual interface is not very important, because if API exists, 3-rd party programs can embrace it. For example Windows 7 had virtual desktops implemented on system level (there wasn't UI to manage them), but API was very limited, for example it wasn't possible to move windows between desktops. Also applications usually weren't aware about those desktops and sometimes were outright buggy (for example you couldn't launch second Firefox window on another desktop).