> Deno set out to change that and be something new, but they squandered that chance because it was too risky for their investors

Maybe it was too risky for users? The people with the most appetite for a new start and a new way of doing things are people who are suffering from their existing investment in Node. Making a halfway jump to a new platform with no path to completing the migration would leave their customers running on two platforms indefinitely. It's the worst-case outcome for a migration, going halfway and getting stuck with your feet in two canoes.

By supporting Node, Deno lets customers switch to something new and better and bring their legacy baggage along as well.