[APM] Use consistent time picker across Observability UIs

[LucaWintergerst]

Describe the feature:

the APM UI (and other UIs within Observability) use a time picker that does not share all the funcctionality with other time pickers that we have across Kibana, mainly the "Recently used time range" feature.
We should align the functionality here by using a shared component.

This list shows which of the time pickers currently support the recent time ranges:

Observability
[Overview] - not supported
[Alerts] - supported
[Cases] - no time picker

Logs
[Stream] - not supported
[Anomalies] - not supported
[Categories] - not supported

Metrics
[Inventory]  - different time picker, not supported
[Metrics Explorer] - not supported

APM
[Services] - not supported
[Traces] - not supported
[Dependencies] - not supported
[Service Map] - not supported

Uptime
[Monitors] - not supported
[TLS Certificates] - ?

User Experience
[Dashboard] - not supported

From @ \ dgieselaar:

we can also use prefab components from unified_search that deliver this out of the box

@ \ boriskirov

if it something that already added in many places in Kibana and contextually makes sense, I also feel it's a good idea to add something like that. We can also track the usage with time and be more confident if it makes sense to stay or not.

@ \ jasonrhodes

+1 to Dario’s suggestion of leveraging a shared time picker component to avoid being having to track features that pop up “everywhere else” like this … is the APM “compare” feature built into the existing APM time picker? Might be the main blocker there for now.

Describe a specific use case for the feature:

[elasticmachine]

Pinging @elastic/apm-ui (Team:apm)

[dannycroft]

Related: #82751

[smith]

This probably should be tracked through #126095.

[smith]

This can be solved by all solutions adopting Unified Search. Please see or update the "Adoption" section on #126095 with relevant issues.

[sorenlouv]

@smith Did you mean to link to #12609 or something else? Doesn't look related to Unified Search

[smith]

@sqren nope sorry I meant #126095. Updated in the original comment.

[dannycroft]

@smith is this supposed to be closed? Looks accidental to me.

[smith]

It is supposed to be closed. #82751 should replace it. This was clear on #126095 but it looks like the Exalate bot removed the "Adoption" section on the issue for some reason.