I, personally, find Electrum buggy with its implementation. BlueWallet's lightning compatibility isn't non-custodial.
Agreed. Electrum's implementation at it's current stage is not user-friendly enough and is quite annoying to use.
Lightning network has intrinsic benefits over the primary layer but it isn't all that applicable at this stage. Not a lot of people use LN for day-to-day transactions, or even Bitcoin for that matter. The fees are low enough right now, and we don't have to care about inbound capacity either. It becomes a self-perpetuating cycle, where if adoption is low, then no exchanges would adopt it and the cycle continues.
I tinhk that you touched main points here.
Wallets implementations are not easy to use. I used exclaim once and it was a terrible experience, and I overpaid a lot of fees to open and close the channel because the wallet lacked proper fee customization.
I was going to try electrum, but I will wait a few more patches after I saw your comment.
Additionally, fees are very low right now.
If you are not in hurry, just send a 1 Sat byte transaction that it will get a confirmation soon enough.
People are paying over 30 usd to send eth and over 100 usd for uniswap swaps (I used last week)
Bitcoin fees are amazingly low right now.
I would have an incentive to use LN in recurrent payments , such as signature campaigns or to an exchange that I use a lot...