The flip side perspective of this is that end users are forever plagued with poorly-performing/behaving software, because developers favor their convience over user experience by continually moving on to new technologies before they're mature enough to be satisfactory replacements of the old stuff.
But the majority of users/clients/bosses won't pay for better software. They want it now, for free.
The market is asking for more and more software, with more and more complex features. And they must be usable on many platforms, by users incapable or writing their name correctly, let alone comprehend a computer.
In the mean time you have a bit more trained programmers, but not that much more. And most of them are not remotely good enough to provide fast, reliable and usable software. The ones that can are expensive.
In this situation, any shortcut you can take, you take.
It's like the quality of food or kitchen wear. You want 1000 of fruits available all year long ? Ok, but the quality will suck. You want everybody to be able to afford 10 machines to do every single things instead of you. Sure, but they'll break in 2 years.
My mothers kept her machines for 20 years, and I can seldom keep mine for 5. I eat tasty tomatoes 25 years ago. Today I have to look for them with expert knowledge and a bag of money or they'll taste like plastic.
As long as everybody wants a piece of the cake but nobody wants to pay for quality and don't want to wait, well, you'll end up in those situations.
For software, this is only going to get worse. Every year, I get paid more and more, I accumulate more knowledge that the newcomers are struggling with. I refuse work. And I don't get penalized for any shortcut I take.
