Let me play the devil&#x27;s advocate:<p>Why should I as a user be forced to upgrade from a system which does it&#x27;s job just fine only because the system&#x27;s manufacturer decides that they don&#x27;t want to spend any more resources on patching up errors in this system? Having bought the system, shouldn&#x27;t I have gotten a product that is reasonably secure in the first place? How do I know that the new shiny replacement system doesn&#x27;t introduce new problems which take years until they are discovered and could be much worse than the old system where already a lot of work has gone into fixing bugs?<p>I bet the real reasons are much more mundane. I&#x27;ve seen several times where updating a <i>single</i> tool in game production teams takes <i>years</i>, because the &#x27;time is never right&#x27;, the update can&#x27;t be done incrementally, and the production can&#x27;t afford to switch the whole team over and risk weeks of instability and bug-hunting because unexpected bugs crop up that didn&#x27;t manifest in small-scale tests.<p>Basically: never change a running system :)