Late '90's Taurus did some clean up and the quality of their revolvers jumped by leaps and bounds in the QC department.
Some, but not all of their triggers feel like they came from the S&W performance shop. (when buying new try and dry fire them before purchasing and find the best trigger)

I carry a 605 snubby 5 shot 357mag and dont feel undergunned. I practice w/ 38's and the 158 grain 357 magnum loads are almost brutal (leave rubber on your hand from the grip) I have a few Taurus guns but none in 44 Mag.

I can't imagine shooting a light weight 357 let alone one in 44 mag. (who was that gun rag writer that after retiring found out he had multiple wrist hairline fractures from shooting big bore revolvers??)

If that's what you plan to do, more power to ya. As far as issues... I've only had one.
I had a yolk retaining screw wear out from magnum loads after about.... I don't know 500 rounds. (probably from rapid tactical reloads- pressing violently on the extractor). I called Taurus and they did not have a blue replacement screw in stock and sent out a stainless one. Got it express mailed to me within 2 days. Forgot about it, shot and continued to carry it. About 6 months later a blue screw showed up in the mail. (kudos for remembering)

Overall I am happy with my Taurus. I would put them on par or better than the current Smith & Wesson. In fact I have sold all of my newer Smith and Wesson revolvers after their cost cutting features that were introduced in late '90's. I actually prefer Taurus over S&W.

This is in no way reflective of their semi-auto pistols which I think still have a short way to go.

On a personal note:
I skipped the 44 Mag and own 45LC guns. The 45LC can do everything the 44 can do and more in modern guns. Just throwing that out there...