Windows has lots of old systems, but they just continue to run the old systems for a few years, and then 20 more years after support ends. It's a lot easier to

Windows has lots of old systems, but they just continue to run the old systems for a few years, and then 20 more years after support ends. It's a lot easier to maintain old versions when there are fewer of them and they are all corporate backed. One team can keep a version going. But with Linux there are thousands of versions, arguably millions because it encourages customization even beyond just choosing a distro. With Windows, Android, and just about any other commercial style thing, there are versions that come out once per year or so, with either no forks, or forks that promptly get ignored and forgotten, or very minor customizations that don't really add or remove anything beyond the wallpaper and launcher. And they generally preserve backwards compatibility better than Linux, because the stack can just be application+bundled libraries -> OS stuff fully controlled by OS vendor. There's no systems made of small pieces meant to be interchanged by the installer, any one of which could stop working on a new system, all by different teams, you know your GUI toolkit works on the new OS version because it ships with the new OS version. There are no other distros, because even when they are possible, like with AOSP, there's no culture of tinkering, people just take what they get, which both prevents fragmentation, and on the other side, gives the developers a reason not to make migration too hard, because they are trying to make one distro for all, not just a distro for their 10% of users. Ubuntu does a good job of trying to be "The standard Linux", but things still change and break between versions far more than on Android.