[Tommy430]

> why should they care about a dead and insecure os.

Developing for old technologies in general (especially hardware) can help make your code and project lighter in general.

(see: alternative frontends for YouTube and Twitter, YouTube circa. 2005-2011, even 2012-2016)

[FinnKuhn]

It can do that, but it can also mean that you can't use better performing ways to do things that were only introduced in a newer OS.

[Narishma]

You can if you have fallbacks for when those features aren't available.

[comex]

True, but that tends to require a bunch of extra code, and adds complexity since now you have two different paths to test. Which is manageable, but definitely cuts against the goal of keeping the project “light”. (Of course, it depends on the feature and the language/environment you’re using. Sometimes the fallback is trivial, or can be neatly encapsulated in a third-party polyfill you never have to look at.)

[CJefferson]

But why have fallbacks for unsupported OSes, which are hard to even test (as the OSes themselves probably shouldn’t be attached to the internet due to possible security issues).

[npteljes]

Now that is the part where it doesn't make the project lighter.