I agree with you to a point, but I think this is also an issue that is more complicated than it may seem at first glance. A lot of the time, the older, more com

I agree with you to a point, but I think this is also an issue that is more complicated than it may seem at first glance. A lot of the time, the older, more complex version had some initial design that solved a particular problem but didn't fully consider some alternative use cases. A redesign might capture these other use cases, but inevitably the evolution of a library also contains a lot of tweaks and fixes for smaller but not insignificant cases that are easily lost in the redesign. Often the new technology appears cleaner at first but then grows more complex as it starts getting used and those corner cases and missing bits accumulate, or it may actually have lost some functionality that seemed arcane to the redesigners but was actually a desired feature by some set of users. A problem is rarely as simple as it may appear before it is actually deployed and used.