Windows 95 hasn't "stopped working" either. :hmm:
You know exactly what I mean. The modern Windows NT kernel based OS's (Vista, 7, 8, etc) are several orders of magnitude closer to each other in ever depreciating gains per iteration vs the old flaky "
sort of 16/32 bit, DirectX 1.0, doesn't even support FAT32, USB 1.0, UDMA for PATA, or AGP graphics out of the box" Windows 95. It's one hell of a straw-man to even begin to make a 7 vs 10 must = 7 vs 95 comparison.

MS are "hitting the upgrade reluctance wall" due to year on year hardware stabilizing, the annual prior "upgrade rat race" ending and also hitting the usability peak for general desktop UI stuff. Eg, PCI-E has been around since 2004 - those 11 years under one forwards / backwards compatible bus have been more stable than the previous incompatible ISA -> Vesa-Local-Bus -> PCI-> AGP during 1991-1996. Same with SATA vs PATA DMA 0-7 / PIO, USB vs RS232 Serial / PS2 / parallel ports pre-plug & play, floppy to competing super-floppy non-standards to universal USB flash, etc.
XP to 7 was the last big "hardware related OS jump" for many which included : driver-less SATA, mainstream SSD (TRIM) support, GPT (larger than 2TB discs), proper 4K partition alignment, ExFAT, UDF 2.5 (Blu-Ray), DirectCompute, DirectWrite, DX11, Tessellation, Bluetooth +2.1, 1394b, mobile broadband, AVCHD, DXVA2, Bitlocker, Kernel Patch Protection, horizontal tilt-wheels, libraries, jump lists, mainstream 64-bit, biometrics, MP3 tags shown in Explorer, and a dozen other useful things supported. Since then, unless you use NVM SSD's, it's been a very "slow" decade indeed as far as "needing" every single incremental OS version to avoid hardware "obsolescence".
As for the UI, once you reach single click launches (Quick Launch bar shortcuts, shortcut keys, taskbar pinning), all you can do is shuffle stuff around with different skins and sell it as "Pretty like Google". 'Stuff' doesn't launch any faster today vs 2005 in terms of UI input speed (human time from deciding to open an app to finding and clicking on it), yet both are obviously a massive upgrade from navigating directory trees with "cd" commands in MS-DOS 2.0 after editing config.sys & autoexec.bat files to get the right amount of expanded memory to get a game to run in 4MB RAM all those years ago...
This "upgrade hesitance" isn't an OS-specific issue either - MS Office & Adobe have also been "stuck in a rut" for the same reason. Once you reach a certain usability baseline, a large chunk of the population don't care about upgrading for relatively minor new features, "
to keep up with the Joneses" or because a marketing guy preys on the hyper-consumerists / technophiles emotional insecurity of "being left behind".
I personally know no one who is running Win7 over Win10 right now.
Seems odd considering
that's what the vast majority of people are still using... Same goes for Office 2003-2010 versions, which is what I see far more of than 365 in various sized businesses during the week as part of my job.