in my experience, rebase works great if the commits are structured and much more painful with lots of overlapping changes, say by continiusly doing _wip_ commits every hour
I certainly am not perfect to the degree that I make a single commit or a relatively small number of “structured commits” to any branch I’m working on. Neither is anybody else (regardless of whether they think they are). Anyone who tailors their commit structure around a poorly designed tool interface is just wasting their own time, and therefore the company’s, in my opinion.
Well, I do, more or less. Whether it's a waste of time or not is dependent on how efficient you can do it, in my workflow it's efficient, and to which degree you can avoid waste as a consequence of a "messier" approach. For me, it evens out.
Rebasing takes longer and is actually more prone to error because of the clunky interface. There is absolutely nothing wrong with squashing commits in a feature branch and merging that into master/main. In fact, it's generally better for the health of the repo and the mental health of developers.