That's the worst way to do solar, though. It doesn't get to take advantage of economies of scale in installation and inverters. Some levelized cost of energy studies put it just as expensive as nuclear.

Solar gets its cheapness when it's in fields or on top of large, flat commercial/industrial buildings.

I agree, but off grid solar requires a lot more panels and personal infrastructure owned by the customer than grid tied solar. and a storage solution for night time and winter and cloudy days.

A typical house isn't going off grid and maintaining a worry free electric schedule without a minimum of 25,000$ of panels, mounts, inverters, batteries, BMS, cabling, installation, and permits.

To be fair, the cost is still less than the amount of time the system will last so economically is can be viable but who has 25,000$ just sitting around...you have to be able to install it yourself to save enough money to really even think about doing it.

I am on your side, but we should be focusing on storage technology right now because solar is honestly really advanced at this point. Once those technologies can work together all the arguments against solar that make sense disappear.