I too felt like I was alone shooting JPEG, so gave Raw a run. Side by side, not enough a difference for an amateur like me, and took too much time.
One thing that's useful to keep in mind when considering shooting raw is that
you have to become the equivalent of your camera's JPG processing pipeline.
What do I mean by that? Well, if you shoot JPG your camera is doing quite a lot of image processing on the raw data to deliver a pleasing image. I visualize it as a pipeline of tasks, where one feeds into the other (even if in reality they're happening in unison or out of order):
Demosaic raw data -> white balance multiplication -> gamma & color space transform -> s-curve applied for contrast -> saturation boost -> noise reduction -> sharpening -> saving to JPG file
Those 8 steps would be the absolute bare minimum for a camera to apply in order to get an acceptable JPG from sensor data.
In contrast, when editing a raw file, you really only get the first three steps before you see the image. Thus, once your'e looking at a newly imported image in your favorite raw editor, it will often look
very dull compared to the corresponding JPG precisely because the image processing pipeline isn't finished on the raw file-- the raw processing software assumes you have some kind of creative vision for the image and will be performing the rest of the tasks according to your own criteria.
You must finish the image processing pipeline before the image is ready to be enjoyed by others. Thankfully most raw processors have many methods for speeding up this task of finishing an image from a raw file. You can spend 30 seconds applying a few presets and call it done, or you can spend hours massaging the data and performing a myriad of sophisticated & layered local adjustments. It's completely up to you.
To be clear, there's no judgment here of JPG vs. raw. Both are entirely valid formats to shoot in. Many people are intrigued by the potential of raw and find they enjoy the craft of image completion from raw data, likening it to spending quality time in a photographic darkroom in days long past. Many others would rather shoot the modern-day equivalent of polaroids or do the equivalent of offloading their rolls to a fast development lab to just get their prints processed in bulk so they can move on and keep shooting.
There's no right or wrong here, just very different styles, motivations, and interests. Both JPG and raw are valid formats to shoot in, as long as the photographer understands the trade-offs they're making and why they're making them.