You might be right about it not being intentional (putting aside the argument that lack of choice is itself a choice), but I would argue that putting in the effort is their responsibility as a part of the larger goal of sustainability.
In this case Apple says they want their products to be completely sustainable, and yet they are choosing profit over sustainability by putting fences on either side of the circular treadmill.
I largely agree. I guess I would just say that every decision comes at a cost, and maintaining compatibility usually comes with a small performance cost, exactly the sort of cost Apple least wants to pay on their new devices.
In this case Apple says they want their products to be completely sustainable, and yet they are choosing profit over sustainability by putting fences on either side of the circular treadmill.