If you never do more than update, upgrade, install and remove, then just skip every post recommending different distros for their package manager. For you (as for most users), it will not make the slightest difference if you are using apt, packman, whatever else. If there's something you want your package manager to do but it can't, you'll know. And if it comes to that, you can start diving into the different managers and which one is best suited for the specific thing you want to do.

But it has to be mentioned that aptitude does not have super cow powers of course.

You don't miss out on anything if it does what you need.

For me apt is just slow and clunky, don't like the way some of the commands are and they are long, I prefer the way that pacman and portage do it where I can make commands be sinple and only be couple characters instead of whole words.

I liked pacman because it was fast, and it was really easy to block a package from upgrading and downgrading packages is really easy.

I liked portage because it worked with program's sources so I was able to just remove part's of program's and their dependencies I didn't need.

I like nix now because of the way it manages dependencies, and for the fact that packaing programs in it is really easy to do.

Am I missing out?

Borking your system I guess. /j

Nah, apt is great. I use Arch, but the package manager does not make a difference for me. I think I'd prefer apt for the user friendly terms to use it: apt search, apt install, apt remove, apt purge. Much nicer than the pacman equivalents I haven't even bother to learn.