[pmsaue0]

He applauds MS for continually supporting their legacy software... my opinion is that such legacy support is what continually hampers their rapid development

[brazzy]

When it comes to viability as an infrastructure for business, downwards compatibility clearly trumps rapid development. The same can be seen with Java: having all the shiny, fashionable features the tech geek blogs are abuzz with may be nice... but having old, boring, clunky, uncool software that your business depends on continue to work is far, far more valuable.

[droz]

I think this is an important point that most people forget. Most developers may be interested in doing the latest and greatest thing, but unless it can add value to an organization, then it is worthless.

[icarus_drowning]

While this is true, there is certainly a point where backward compatibility becomes a bit absurd. I'd personally peg it around the 15-year mark.