Isn't there a middle ground? You can get the "safe" non-backwards-compatible update as free/open source, or you can pay for updates that retain backwards compa

Isn't there a middle ground? You can get the "safe" non-backwards-compatible update as free/open source, or you can pay for updates that retain backwards compatibility. There is already a model for this, where companies will pay for support for old versions of software that have been declared EOL and no longer getting "free" updates. Microsoft offers this for older Windows NT versions, for example.