Agreed. My experience with Battle Masters, for example, is just that--mine. No one has played a Battle Master in my games or any I have played, either, except for the one I was just playing. When I realized after several sessions I never actually used anything from the subclass, I asked the DM if I could change it to something I might actually use (which they agreed to).
Do you care to share your actual experiences contrasting the views you've seen others express?
Personally, I'm a little behind on the Tasha's stuff and UA, so that may be part of it. But I can say what I've observed and played.
One example which comes to mind is the Tempest Cleric. Early on, they tended to be somewhat common in games here. Players who leaned more toward good went more of the Thor/Zeus and righteous fury route; those with a less-good morality enjoyed living out Sith-inspired fantasies of zapping things.
As time went on, I think some of the interest waned because newer options (like Storm Sorcerer) offered similar options but with extra features.
At one point, I played a Storm Cleric, but I multiclassed into something else (which I can't remember). I enjoyed the channel divinity to max out damage. I didn't use it often, but it was nice to have when I did use it.
I don't remember anything being particularly outstanding about the class, but -from my own perspective- I liked that I was at least somewhat useful in a wide variety of situations. With heavier armor and better weapons, I could occasionally help out the front line. Being slanted toward thunder and lightning spells meant I could blast like a wizard when needed, but I also always had things like fog cloud on my list for utility and battlefield control.
The main negative that I remember is something which I feel applies to the Cleric in general: not much happens from level 9 to level 17 to keep me interested in the class.
As time went on, I wouldn't say that it remained a popular choice, but I'm not aware of anyone feeling negative toward the subclass.
Likewise, College of Lore tends to be a popular choice here. The flexibility to choose things from outside the class has, from what I can tell, allowed those who prefer story and fluff to fill a large range of archetypes. Those with an eye more toward crunch like being able to cherry pick their favorite spells from other classes.
But I think, over time, choice of Bard lost popularity in general as more players became familiar with some of the MCing tricks that could be achieved via Warlock while still filling a similar role.
Even so, when someone did play a bard, Lore tended to be one of the top choices.
I can partially agree with your views on the Battlemaster. At first, I thought it would be the 5e version of the Warlord. Maneuvers seemed like a pretty cool idea. But I quickly learned that many of them were not very good. The ones which I did use were better enough than the other choices that I usually used the same few over and over again.
In no way do I believe the class is/was weak; it just wasn't the experience I thought it would be going into it.
Oddly, for a subclass which appears to be about battlefield control and helping the team, my experience is that it ends up being more of a damage dealer.
One thing to point out in favor of the subclass is that a lot of the maneuvers still work with ranged attacks.
My usual group is currently playing Spelljammer. I'm not currently in that game, but I can ask them what they're playing and get more info.
They had taken a break from D&D for a while to play other games.