That is a 7 years old iMac. Apple is not forcing you.
So yes, if I want to continue to use macOS and want to stay on the latest release, then "having to upgrade hardware" is the only route. If you take issue with me calling that "forcing" then fine, but it's obvious how I'm using that term.
Plenty of hardware from 2013 runs current operating systems- basically only in the Apple ecosystem is this a problem. I doubt there's any _technical_ reason older hardware cannot run newer versions of macOS. Apple just draws a line whereever they want.
I understand this is a "known concern" of being a part of the Apple ecosystem- but it's one of the first times I've encountered it personally, so yes, it's frustrating.
The latest version of Windows 10 runs great on 10 year old desktops, and will probably be supported for many more years to come.
I'm not MS's biggest fan, and I have my own peeves with Windows, but the way you worded this seems unnecessarily hostile.
I use Windows, Linux, and macOS for various purposes and I understand the benefits and drawbacks of using them. You don't need to talk down to me about telemetry and updates.
Spinning having to buy unnecessary new hardware to continue running an up-to-date OS as a benefit seems ridiculous to me.
With Apple preventing dual boot on ARM this problem will only get worse.
Durability has long been a feature of these machines, even sadder to be forced into hardware upgrades by what seems to be intentionally broken core features like wifi.
But I don't think it's fair to characterize what could very well be a hardware fault as the work of some bean counter in Cupertino sitting behind his desk rubbing his hands with glee.
This attitude needs to stop.
If a user's needs are met with a 7 year old machine and they are happy without upgrading then artificially obsoleting it in the name of capitalism is not progress, it's irresponsible.
I have an old Mac that I use daily that maxed out at Mojave. It still functions fine. Nobody forced me to do anything to it in the name of capitalism.
You said yourself that his current machine meets his daily needs. So what's the problem? It's not going to turn off the day Big Sur is released.
Not forced, but unnecessarily required to purchase new hardware to run the latest OS version which should not have any reason for not working on the older hardware. I still think that's a problem.
If there was a feature of Big Sur that required particular hardware to run, then I would be more understanding. Yes, I can stay on Catalina on my iMac, but it will continue to get more out of date when Apple could have easily kept supporting it. I'm understanding enough to know Apple has business reasons for doing it, and maybe even technical ones (that no one has yet explained) but it doesn't mean I agree with it.
Sometimes older hardware isn’t capable of supporting new features. In prior cases it might not have a 64 bit processor or not enough memory, and of course you can’t expect support in those cases.
In this it’s old WiFi hardware that can’t support new features. It would be dumb for Apple to take engineers off making Big Sur more solid for 98% of Macs to waste time on this problem for a tiny percent of the active base.
Apple is doing exactly the right thing. Make it work well for the vast majority, then see if they can take it farther back in the first couple of bug fix releases.