I don't see it that way. The team has released new versions with major issues on a fairly regular basis, and this was exacerbated by having a forced auto-update

I don't see it that way. The team has released new versions with major issues on a fairly regular basis, and this was exacerbated by having a forced auto-update that could only be resolved by dropping down to v2.5. So they pushed people to an older, stable version they didn't want to support. To my mind, the decision here shouldn't have been to make people pay protection money to stop a new release breaking their setup. They could make the whole damn thing paid-for instead and I'd be happier with that. There is clearly something missing in their development and QA process that causes this auto-updating to be so visible and painful. They could have kept the feature as-is and worked on making sure new releases were solid, while also having a mechanism to revert. I have no problem with my browser updating itself that way, as I never notice if something broken and got rolled back in the canary stage. To be honest, avoiding criticism by whining about entitlement adds no more to the conversation than pure entitlement itself. I can't see any purpose it serves other than to start a flame war.