That is certainly true but I wonder if this effect is exaggerated by the methodology of this study.

If they simply count existing lines of code/SO questions and none of those ever get deleted, then inertia is bound to increase.

The more old lines of code/questions there are, the longer it takes for any new language to rise in the rankings, even if the new language is used for all new code.

But I don't know enough about the methodology of this study. Maybe they are doing something against this statistical incumbency effect.

1. Legacy code too expensive to replace. Or even stupid to replace.

2. Talent pool in said languages.

That reasoning is plausible, but a large portion of their longevity could easily be due to network effects (libraries + legacy code) and nothing to do with the quality of the languages.

Well is there really any incentive to change? Code is just a method of communication with the computer, just like language is. Sure a country like France could move over to speaking English instead of French and probably be a little better off for it, but fundamentally, French gets the job done just fine. There's too much inertia to change amongst established companies I think.

I've heard this opinion that technology never disappears. Like there are users even for the most primitive technology.