I am not so sure that this is really as big of a problem as it's made out to be. To me it seems like people trying to make Linux software management work like Windows because that's what they are used to, so if the experience is different than what they are used to they assume it doesn't work well.

Going to some project's website and trying to find a download to install is not typically how you install software on Linux, and people distributing software like that for Linux probably don't know much about Linux software distribution themselves.

If you want a good experience you should be installing software from the system package manager instead of searching for deb files that are probably out of date and won't work on your system due to shared library compatibility issues. Using the system package manager is much different than what many are used to but it actually works very well. The other option is to use flatpak or similar software, which is designed to sanely handle out of repo software installation.

I think people distributing their own deb/rpm/etc files from their project's website are causing active harm and confusing people who are new to Linux. The best option is to provide a link to the distros package if it exists (https://archlinux.org/packages/foo), instructions on how to build from source and a flatpak image (or similar). When a new user downloads a stray deb and has a bad experience with it (broken software, system breakage, etc) it really leaves a poor impression on them that could have easily been avoided.