While there is truth to what you say, Apple does lay in the price premium. And that is always a factor in play here... basically, if I'm going to pay 30%, 40% or more for the same combination of hardware available in other brands of hardware in an eye-of-the-beholder, prettier case, I expect to get the most bang for my bucks. Paying up for what seems outdated is harder to do. Paying up for what seems very outdated is still harder.
Pair that with the common knowledge that Apple is swimming in piles of hoarded cash and it's hard to reconcile why they can't allocate the talent & resources to keep all product lines up to date. Yes, there could be "millions" at stake in added customer service calls and embracing newer chipsets... but how long does it take Apple to make "millions" when all of their commonly reported financials work in "billions."
Furthermore, Apple rolls out product updates and sales follow. While they sit on their hands, some sales wait for an update or give up and buy the competitor's platform. So even if we can argue that "millions" are at risk, there's probably also corresponding "millions" in opportunity cost waiting to flow TO Apple by those smart enough to know outdated models when they see them.
So yes, I'm sure its very profitable to see increasingly outdated hardware at the originally-offered price for as long as possible. But the non-monetary cost in that is perception, frustration, even the concept that Apple is "ripping off" the gullible buyers who may not realize they are buying months or years-old technology still at the same price when it was rolled out as cutting-edge new.
Other than the bean counter rationale, there doesn't seem to be any good reason for this. And thus, the frustration & aggravation among those who expect more of Apple, even long for a former Apple that seemed better able to "keep up".
