If by a “mixed way” you mean 1-2 days in office, that would never work for a lot of people for the reasons below.

I was thinking more "when I need/want to go to the office" than a fixed schedule.

All your points are valid, but I can make counter-points for a full remote solution, if I want. One example is that for a full remote position you need to have an home office or, at least, a place where you can work without interference. Not everyone has it.

You have to carry all your equipment with you. (I personally have to carry my laptop plus the equipment I support which takes like 2 trips from the car to my desk plus time to set everything up.)

I suppose that depends on the work you do. Of course in some cases a "full remote" or a "full office" solution is better than a mixed approach. For example, I personally have not to carry anything going to the office since I have a work laptop at home and a desktop at the office. I understand I am been lucky btw.

Not all of team comes in the same day/same location, so your still on virtual meetings anyway.

That is just an organizational problem.

To be fair a lot of this is my personal experience and other companies may work differently but for me, I’m staying fully remote. Good companies/teams make it work. If your company/team can’t work like there are other issues at fault.

That's the point. Every way (full remote, full office, mixed and so on) are good for someone and bad for other.