I've never used a package manager that forced you to upgrade all dependencies to the latest version to install a package.
Anyone with an ounce of sense and experience knows that if you have a package for the version of the software that you want, but it's only built for and available in a later version of your distribution, then installing it will result in a cascade that will as good as update your entire system. There wouldn't be dependencies otherwise. On a system where you can automatically recompile like Gentoo then this probably won't be the case, but on binary-only systems it most certainly will be. That's why you have a lot of distro hopping, churn and updating.
Then you get it from elsewhere if the official repos don't provide it.
Translation: In practice you don't get the software you want to install at all unless you give up on the package manager and wind back the clock a couple of decades.
You can even build your own package, something you certainly ought to be capable of if you're applying your own patches to software. You can even set up your own repos!
Which software vendors have steadfastly and correctly said they won't do, and especially not for multiple distributions, versions of distributions and architectures! How's your multiplication? Deployment on this scale is error prone and requires a ton of support that they just won't provide because other more popular platforms don't make them do this. You just don't get the applications, and even the up to date free/open source software applications, you get on platforms where this sort of thing isn't a problem. Screw you, in other words.
So basically what you're saying is, "you're not using the package manager except if you are". Gee, really?
Hmmmmm, and you're the one who's just recommended building your own specific packages or setting up repositories for multiple distributions, versions and architectures, with not the faintest idea of the costs involved in doing that, to stay within that package management system and you're wondering why someone might be suggesting that they stay outside of that brain damage? Hmmmmm. That 'Check Updates....' thing in Firefox that works everywhere else. Why doesn't it fucking work on a Linux platform and why does everyone need to redo the work of providing updates? It's a puzzle. I wonder.............
Most of your post you've been toeing a fine line between being just wrong and being wrong and a trolling asshat. Guess which side you just landed on?....No, the short of it is that you're a moron and your entire post is bullshit, and both you and everyone who modded your post up need to be mercilessly beaten with a cluestick.
I've come to the conclusion that there are a lot borderline people who hover around Linux distributions, and some of them are even developers, who have never known what it is like to develop software for a living, or even as an independent free project, and get it deployed and updated quickly and easily on a user's system. Package management must be the answer to that. You can't question it. You can't look at the Windows or Mac OS world and learn anything from it and ask "Why the hell do they have more free and open source applications packaged and updated regularly for their non-free/non-opensource platforms?"
Package management is the one true solution to software installation. I mean, if it isn't, then the sky might turn fucking pink, or purple, or something. Christ. Anything could happen.