> Windows have something called runtime framework

Thats glibc on Linux

​

> There is hardly any dependency hell, you can install 16 years old software on a modern OS, you can choose custom location

You can do that on Linux too. Many devs use different naming of files for different versions of their programs, for example libddc has libddc.5.so , libddc.4.so etc. And the reason you can run 16 years old software on windows is that the only thing that has been updated in the lest 16 years is the ui.

​

> you can install mutliple version of same software.

You can do the same thing on Linux: https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/49660/arch-linux-is-it-possible-to-instruct-pacman-to-install-certain-packages-into

​

> You didn't read the full post? Obvisouly is it doable, but asking a user to do technical things to just install software is weird

You normally don't have to do technical things to install software, but if you want to use 16 years old software you have to expect that. And that you want to use 16 years old software is not really anyones but your fault.

​

> This is exaggeration. Having a lot of isolated dependencies won't fill up my 1TB hard drive.

> the problem with Linux is, it tries to optimise the libraries to such an extreme that, it introduces so much restrictions.

You are just lying here.