In my public university in Spain, we always had the option to do a single final exam instead of the continuous assessment, although very few chose it. Generally the continuous assessment was less stressful, and the material stuck better, with room to digest it rather than just cramming for the exam and forgetting it right after. Generally the default expectation was that everyone was a full time student yes, but there were proper accommodations for those that weren't.
It is definitely a lot more work for the professors though, most of my family are teachers. It's a lot of assessments and it's very rare to have funding for TAs. Some think that the extra work with worthwhile for the sake of transmitting the knowledge more effectively, but not all of them do.
Frankly, you sound a bit bitter about it from the professor's perspective, and somewhat rationalizing why it is bad for the students. But students do generally appreciate it, and yes good students too, not just cheaters. I think both good and bad students end up learning more and hating the process less.
Your comments on Bologna do resonate though, it was very confusing when I continued to study in Germany and the Netherlands. The massive reforms were supposed to be for alignment with EU, but if anything it got more misaligned. They unified all 3 and 5 year degrees into 4 year degrees, but in most of EU all degrees are 3 years now, for instance.
Regarding the parent comment, indeed, my Computer Science degree was mostly hand-written exercises and exams, and it wasn't that long ago. The degree is about fundamentals, about understanding concepts and applying them, about the tools you need to learn anything in CS afterwards. You are expected to learn most of the practical skills for building software on your own, since they are ever-changing. And I have to say, that style of education has served me very well in my career.
PS: I was also surprised to learn that most of the undergrad exams in Germany, and some in NL, are oral. I can see how that might be a disadvantage to some, but writing is also a disadvantage to others. I quite liked it, less intense than a long written exam, and I think the professor can get a much clearer understanding of the student's grasp of the subject. But again, it's a ton of work for the professor, 20-30 mins per student one-on-one, giving them your full attention, adds up quickly.