If a hardware vendor pulls support for your product, it's almost always better to end of life the device.
A better argument is that vendors of consumer hardware should require that their partners sign up for long term support agreements where warranted. Let's not pretend that, just because a software company is big, they can force one of the largest chip vendors in the world to bow to their demands.
[edit] Just saw this comment that make sense : https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8943924
For another anecdote, Galaxy Nexus also supported BT 4.0 BLE with its Broadcom chip, but Google decided it wont enable it for 4.3 release. When I've found that out, it pissed me off immensely, so I found a solution how to enable the support and posted it as a flashable .zip on xda [1]. Same was also for N7 2012 and N10. After flashing BLE worked just fine.
Google doesn't care for its old devices, nor did it cared when it shipped, Nexus line was always awesome hardware, but not fully utilized by software, which is sad from an engineers point.
[1] http://forum.xda-developers.com/galaxy-nexus/development/mod...
Google Glass uses a TI OMAP SoC from the same generation (4430). The brand-new Moto 360 uses a TI OMAP SoC from the preceding (!) generation (3630).
Google Glass runs KitKat, the Moto 360 even runs Android Wear 5.
Neither the Glass nor Moto 360 suffer from this problem since neither has a cellular radio.
Even shipping 4.4 with a 4.3 kernel would be far superior to having what is essentially a brick.
Secondly, I purchased a Galaxy Nexus from Google in late April, 2012 with the understanding that it would receive updates for at least 2 years. That is why I was very disappointed when it was not eligible for an update that arrived less than 18 months after I purchased it.
It is truely sad that a perfectly good phone is essentially e-waste, and cannot be used due to this bug.