I had a chat with some former collegues the other week, and was reminiscing about the days of old. We happened to discuss the days when Kernel versions were held and never changed. In fact, any company playing with our very stable kernel version 1.3 would have some testing to do before we would adopt the new 1.4 version with something-or-other added to it.
Times have changed, or at least in my new client and working environment. Now, needs decide the kernel and focus has left the "don't you dare change my kernel or-else" stance to one of "well, if it squeezes some power out of the processors, I will look at it."
In fact, I like what is happening. I like the change. I like taking hardware and running the OS of the day, then upgrading it and finding it runs about twice as fast. To me, that is like putting updated software in my car and getting twice the speed, and twice the economy. (I wish my car would do that.) I like feeling like there is a something-for nothing equation in place, and perhaps only in software - it is possible and is happening more and more. I think improvements should occur. At the risk of signing my own death warrant, perhaps this model of software should be annually paid for in favour of speed and other updates - never having to purchase upgrades again.
Ok, wait - let me clarify. I support that licensing model ONLY if I get something out of it. If the OS or software using this model becomes stale and I am paying annually for absolutely nothing in return - forget it. I do that now with other licensing. Pay 1.5x the purchase price, and IF any upgrades come within a year, you get them free. I don't think that has ever worked in my favour.