A related issue that is somewhat the inverse, which has always bothered me, is the seemingly intentional sabotage of performance and hardware by way of software updates, essentially building in incremental sabotage and obsolescence.
What I am referring to is that fundamental performance is negatively impacted by OS updates that are usually mandatory, e.g., an iPhone or windows computer cannot load a basic website as fast as it could in the past, a basic function of the device, due to imposed software updates.
There should be a legal requirement that the basic functions and performance of a device cannot degrade without justification over time. Imagine if your car required mandatory computer updates or maintenance that resulted in things like losing 100hp over 5 years, or it took longer and longer between hitting the unlock button and the locks actuating, or the brake responsiveness got worse and worse with every update; and then being told you have to buy a new car to get all those features back.
I understand that there are certain things that cause preference degradation, but when it is imposed without real choice and there is no incentive for developers to actually prevent degradation, then there is also San incentive to intentionally sabotage customers.
If anyone remembers the push and emphasis on performance that Steve Jobs imposed on apple engineers after using an older apple device, it is clearly possible. I clearly recall that when that update went out, it majorly improved the performance and UX of older apple devices.