Agreed. Then there's the new instruction sets within the new chips that aren't within the old chips. Imagine a robot working in a tire shop. Version 1.0 of the robot might have to be told by the programmer every detail on how to take a tire off (i.e. step 1: make sure air tools compressor is on, step 2: put air hammer in right hand, step 3: place air tool against topmost lugnut, etc.). Version 2.0 might have much of that detail built in so that the only things the programmer has to do is say: Step 1-- take the lugnuts off, step 2: remove wheel, etc.). If 90% of the tire shops have version 2.0 or higher of the robot it might not be worth your while to make new software backwards compatible to using version 1.0 as well. It's the same way when making program code (including code in the OS) backwards compatible.
Finally, there's bloat. We demand a lot more from our OS than we used to. I'm old enough to remember when no one expected an OS to have its own networking protocols, much less a web browser. The idea was an IT dept would install the networking protocols specific to their system. Those days are long gone. Now we want an OS to do the networking, the automatic OS updates, manage device drivers and keep them updated, (and in Windows case) sync with Outlook email and Teams, etc.
In essence what you describe is a form of centralized control.
Take “state rights” to individualize away, make the power central, prevent imitations that individuals could use, make everyone use the no brainer — but you have to trust central control, and you should NOT trust it.
But make and distribute a VERSION of a that great centralized control system (with open source) that even the small guys can use and TRUST (and MODIFY with great individual ideas) without bribing and bowing to the deep state swamp) and you will have freedom, instead of world-wide control by unaccountable wokidoke communomarxistfascist criminal corporations.