The point is that to get further security updates, you have to spend money to run the new major version of Windows. You can run the most up-to-date Linux for free on a computer from 1989.

One might ask why we need security patches in the first place and why can't we write secure software from the beginning.

Aren't we just trying to do to much and releasing defective software. Why is it accepted?

Good point.

As a response to the kernel's various SNAFUs, I've gone ahead and refunded to myself all of the money I've spent on Linux kernels over the past several decades -- and updated my install to the new version for free.

Not really, but

1) there’s no implied warranty of merchantability with the hobbyist system

2) the “business model” (such as it is) of open source doesn’t push distros to hide security updates behind a pathway

3) generally Linux is usually getting better so I want to update anyway

I mean... people do it with Android phones all the time.