When do you think it starts becoming ridiculous to demand the rights to not update to the user? Do you think that a juicer that stops working because its firmware hasn't been updated recently, and they just changed their expiration date API, is reasonable? After all, yeah, I'm using their health-friendly juicer as a service, just as I'm using a TV to decode the airwaves as a service.
If it can't do its job at all without an internet connection then denying functionality if you don't update is entirely reasonable in my book. If it can do its primary job without an internet connection then no it's not.
I think an one-month-old app that refuses to work is a bit too much.
You didn't update your apps for a month, it shouldn't be that big of a deal but security fixes, bugs, and new features are several reasons why they need you to keep it up to date.
For example they introduced a new feature allowing drivers to see you on the map so they can find you more easily (you can disable it) most user will add extra pressure on the support by contacting them telling them they don't have that feature while it's 100% their fault for not updating, now if they force updates that's will reduce their costs.
Your view of it is simplistic and you only see your own benefit and not the full picture.
Yes the things you use everyday could stay the same for you and just work but that won't bring any income to the companies, if you buy a juicer that needs to be connected to the internet to work that's your own stupid decision.
I'd argue that the real problem is that software is eating the world, and companies are becoming less relevant to everyday life, but trying to force ways to stay relevant.
Your device, workflow, and lifestyle are generally pretty integral to your devices, work, and life, so it's natural to want to exercise control over them?