Comment by troad

> For many, the decision of which protocol to use was easy because IPv6 didn't add features that represented major improvements.

This is the obvious and only key to this puzzle.

We tech nerds have this mad idea that everyone will want to spend time and money adapting to new standards because they're technically better in some abstract way, and so we do absolutely no work to create incentives for anyone to switch. Often, the new standard is not (yet) even functionally equivalent to the old one (e.g. Wayland), just to make doubly sure the switch will be as difficult and undesirable for end users as possible.

And when the absolutely inevitable consequences occur - stakeholders do not want to invest in switching to or developing for new standards that give them zero incentive to do so - there's a silly finger pointing game, as though everyone was supposed to switch, and they've failed to do so. Which is, of course, absurd. People don't owe us compliance.

Do not expect to be able to successfully shift behaviour unless you give people incentives - reasons they would want to switch, not just reasons you want them to switch.