I know little in depth, regarding Linux Systems. I am sure someone on the forum will answer your queries, However.
Your post is, in a nutshell, an attack on Microsoft Windows in their entirety.
First off, Bearing in mind my first sentence, I have, over many years, tried various Linux systems. In the end I have been forced to dump them. This, admittedly, on the grounds of a lack of knowledge on the different methods of accomplishing simple things. One disturbing feature was, even now, the need to run command prompts for some fairly normal functions My overall assessment was, up to Mint, the last one I tried, Microsoft windows was vastly superior in all round operation.
Googling, and a
little personal knowledge, tells me
1. Linux certainly can get viruses, but few virus tormenters are interested in wasting their "talents" on an open source OS. Why would there be available anti virus programs, if not? See here:
http://www.tecmint.com/linux-operating-system-is-virus-free/
One reason why Linux is a little more protected, is due to its necessity to have a root password set up, during installation. Microsoft windows, and even computers, also have this choice, but many choose to ignore it. Unfortunately, digressing a little, there are literally thousands of pirated copies of Microsoft in use. These installations, for obvious reasons, are vulnerable.
Root kit/UEFI facilities on modern computers have taken care of quite a lot of the hacking problems, be it Microsoft or Linux.
2. There are Firewalls available for linux. But the same proviso as above. No one has a serious intent to hack Linux, other than to secure your private data. Easily done without a firewall.
3. There are cleaners, with a similar function to Windows registry cleaners, Gconf cleaner is the most noted one. Whilst Linux does not have a registry, it has a load of config files attached to each installation, and obsolete material will build up in the same areas.
4. Defragging. This page might sum it up
http://www.howtogeek.com/115229/htg-explains-why-linux-doesnt-need-defragmenting/
But, there are modern alternatives. An SSD, readily available these days, and often supplied with new Computers, do not need defragging. Defrag, in the later windows installations., is a discrete background process which, under normal circumstances, the user would not notice.
I do not consider it a talking point.
5. Cleaning program? See note 3.
6. A user can elect to have drivers installed automatically, or install them manually. My own personal experience, over the past one or two years, is that those which are installed during the initial installation, are usually full functional. During my experiments into Linux, I have had endless problems with latter day computers, concerning drivers. This, again, could be due to my lack of knowledge of Linux.
7. I cannot defend the point of Windows 8, for example, requiring newer computers. It is true. But, again, how old? The oldest I have at my disposal is a 6 year old Laptop. It runs Windows 8/8.1 perfectly. (With all its drivers intact)
8. Yes, No argument. Windows costs. Sorry for a hackneyed comment but, in my case anyway, "you gets what you pay for"
P.S. Just needed to add. With these days, I do not consider the size of the installation as important. There are, in fact, smaller MS installations for the needy, but they have limited functionality.