But Mozilla doesn't want to maintain security patches for X different products. And that's true of most vendors. This model of computing where all users are alw

But Mozilla doesn't want to maintain security patches for X different products. And that's true of most vendors. This model of computing where all users are always on the latest version makes security patching and bug fixing a lot more straight forward. This is much less of a problem if you only release new versions at a slower pace, as we used to. There is no good reason that something like a web browser needs to do major updates every month or two. For most users, having a major release annually with just point releases for security fixes in the meantime would be more than sufficient. I've worked on plenty of professional software that would release a new major version perhaps every 1-2 years and seemed to have no difficulty with backporting security patches and sometimes other important bug fixes for several versions. It's not rocket science. It just doesn't fit nicely into the modern dev culture of pushing everything forwards as fast as possible with little regard for stability or backward compatibility and with the ratchet effects from data format changes and deploying updates to the software seen as positive things.