It's actually reasonably consistent with how .NET has been versioned for the past 4-5 years. They've never pretended to follow "semver", but their versioning system works.
From a version number point of view maybe, but to say 'it works' is pretty charitable. CLR versions vs framework version confusion - "oh, you've got a .NET 3.5 app, you need CLR version 2.0". ASP.NET version vs framework versions. ASP.NET 5 vs ASP.NET 4.6 (ASP.NET 5 was re-named to ASP.NET Core 1.0). I guess CLR versioning "works" but in the broader .net ecosystem it is still a problem.
i don't agree that CLR vs .NET versions are confusing. .NET is the CLR plus a pile of libraries. The CLR moves slowly, the non-clr parts of .NET iterate faster. I rarely even think about the CLR version at all. It was a minor consideration 10 years ago when CLR 1->2, but even then it was somewhat of a theoretical point that was basically handled by the version of .NET you targeted.
> so many feature's
.NET is huge, this release is tiny.
Huh? There are like 2 features that affect everyone. Both minor.