Allen some of the specialized programing hasn't been improved as much as you think. Newer versions may be easier to use bu at the cost of not being able to do as much. Thats why I wait ask around and take a look at the program on someone elses computer before I upgrade to the newest form of anything.
@eewanco: Perhaps you're right. Hey, maybe some folks even prefer push-blade lawn mowers or leaded gasoline--who am I to judge? But when you're a software and/or Web developer, this kind of thing can be hell. Dogbert could have (I would go so far as to say "should have") said: "Step away from the IE6!" When your last four projects go over schedule and budget to support obsolete apps, when you're digging into old manuals to figure out how to write code that will work on systems from 1996-2010, when you're at the umpteenth requirements meeting listening to the stakeholders say, "Oh, and make sure it runs on <insert 15-year-old technology here>, we've got one guy in accounting that still uses it..."
This is a little unfair. He might as well refer to getting rid of pencil and paper. There's nothing wrong with using a tool that serves you well. Typically upgrades today consist primarily of bloated user interface changes that just confuse everyone who's been using it and require twice the memory and CPU power that you have. Who wants that? Unless you want to buy a whole new machine, which is a colossal headache, and for what purpose? To be "hip" with a new version that still doesn't do what you want it to do?
Heck, I still run Windows 98 on one machine and it works just fine. (I tried to upgrade it to XP but the hardware didn't support it.)
I like to use my machines as long as they are useful. I have one machine that's twelve or thirteen years old and still does exactly what I need it to do. "Obsolete" to me means something that doesn't fit your needs anymore. If it works fine, don't fix it.