I guess it depends on what kind of "power user" you are because windows is pretty limited (why else would they frankestein an Ubuntu terminal into the latest Windows versions?).
Cygwin (OSS compiled to Win APIs)
Powershell (Native Windows fun)
WSL 1 (Linux ABI Bindings to Win Kernel)
WSL 2 (Thin Hyper-V running a full Linux Kernel, with Plan9 FS mappings to Windows filesystem) (Insider Preview, should be releasing this quarter)
Hyper-V
DOSBox
Docker (Hyper-V, soon to take advantage of WSL-2)
Much as I love DOSBox, I don't think it belongs on your list.
In fact, DOSBox's command line capabilities are weak compared to genuine MS-DOS (which is already quite weak to begin with) – it doesn't fully support COMMAND.COM's syntax, it lacks many of the commands/utilities that come with MS-DOS, etc. – it is just the bare minimum to get most game launcher batch files to work. And that's unlikely to ever change, since DOSBox devs generally aren't interested in improving the accuracy of the MS-DOS emulation unless that improvement helps run some game – if you want a more accurate emulation of MS-DOS, they'll point you to FreeDOS instead.
maybe I'm not what you would call a "power user", but I do write code for a living. I'm sure you would have a bad time if you expect windows to work like your favorite linux distro, but I find it perfectly serviceable for my work. it gets in my way far less than macOS.
I use Windows to develop Linux applications and am happy like a clam with this approach.
Certainly not to help you administer your Windows system, which is not at all what it is intended for.