There is a lot that can be said about the imbalance between Strength and Dexterity.
I am here going to raise a point about how much 5e favours ranged combat compared to melee combat and then conclude by going back to the Strength vs Dexterity discussion bringing some ideas of possible fixes in the fore.
Melee Combat vs Ranged Combat
The biggest advantage of Ranged combat is of course the ability to reach out and touch the majority if not all the hostiles at any given time especially if you take the relative freedom of movement in 5e.
There are two issues tied for the second biggest advantage ranged combat enjoys.
2a. Archery fighting style is arguably the best and it combines exceptionally well with Sharpshooter feat.
2b. There are 4 ways to counter ranged combat: i. Cover, ii. Extreme Range, iii. Melee Engagement, iv. Falling Prone. Sharpshooter practically negates i. and ii. and crossbow expert negates iii. Under most circumstances falling prone is BAD.
3. A few monsters or spells negatively affect melee attackers, either with debuffs the trigger based on proximity or by being attacked.
4. The damage is comparable, with certain ranged builds being able to outdamage melee builds. Plus we have stackable magic ammunition and magic weapons.
5. Better magical support. Yes swift quiver I am looking at you and the 10 lvl bards with 4 longbow attacks
Strength vs Dexterity
I am going to keep a more combat focused analysis.
Dexterity is a superior save.
Dexterity governs initiative.
Dexterity offers at worse a -1 ac towards strength builds (with no armor related disadvantages)
A dex build is far more versatile at it can do both ranged and melee combat. Compare that to the laughable performance of thrown weapons that strength builds are practically locked in.
I dispute the problem. Hear me out though.
1. The biggest problems with the idea that bows are better is that the analysis doesn't value the threat of OA's - either for extra damage or for changing enemy behavior (influencing them to attack higher AC characters).
2a. A str based melee character will have 2-3 AC over a comparable dex based ranged character (+1 heavy armor, +1 Defensive Style or +2 shield).
2b. A dex based melee character will have 2 ac over the comparable dex based ranged character (+2 shield) while also having all the benefits you mentioned above for dex.
2. To summarize, melee characters tend to have significantly higher AC's.
3. Getting advantage as a melee character is much easier than getting advantage as a ranged character (prone)
4. While sharpshooter negates many of the downsides to ranged combat, GWM actually gives a huge buff to melee combat - An extra attack on killing an enemy is huge!
5. The only real downside to thrown weapons is their range. A fighter with the dueling fighting style can do 10.5 damage per thrown javelin (9.5 with daggers if dex based) while having 20 AC (19 with daggers). Compare that to a archery fighting style fighter doing 9.5 Damage with a rapier while having 17 AC.
*I must also completely disagree with your proposition that dex based characters can easily switch from archery to melee. Attempting to do so means you lose the benefit of your fighting style, and feat support for ranged combat and you still don't have a shield out as it's nearly never worth taking a whole turn to gain +2 AC.
**Swift Quiver on a bard at level 10 is pretty bad. Compare it to an eldritch blast and hex warlock at level 11...
***There really needs to be a thrown weapon feat!
