I was once afraid of uploading my Linux box, coming from Windows and fearing that any update would break my system. So I had a pretty old Linux system that at s

I was once afraid of uploading my Linux box, coming from Windows and fearing that any update would break my system. So I had a pretty old Linux system that at some point couldn't work properly (e.g. Firefox was so old that it didn't work on a lot of websites). But then for some reason I started to keep in sync with my distro. The update is painless, reasonably quick, and safe. Usually I only have to fix the outdated python version of my virtualenvs, and to this day I never had to rollback. I have a laptop from 2009 that runs the latests distros without problems. But it cannot run W10 properly, let alone do any work. My point is that Linux is beyond Windows in terms of "upgradeability". Giving the limited resources, why go after Microsoft level of backward compatibility, when any machine can run on the latest distro and libraries? On the other hand, why would anyone keep a XP system around if, acording to the video, a W10 would run their programs so easily? Something doesn't add up.