You've got it backwards
Computers aren't any faster because we are afraid to throw away working systems? Rubbish!
Computers aren't much faster than they were in 1995 because we keep replacing working systems! (By "we" I mean us software guys and users and admins as opposed to the hardware people.) Because we keep throwing away perfectly usable systems in order to replace them with new, supposedly improved, systems, nothing ever gets finished; nothing ever gets fine-tuned; nothing ever gets the bugs worked out before it is replaced by something bigger and "better". By "better" we mean that it may or may not bring functional improvements and useful new features, but these almost always come at a horrendous cost in code bloat, responsiveness, and system overhead. Oh, and a whole new set of bugs and expensive UI changes that cost way more in lost time and training than they ever save in productivity. By the time two-thirds of the bugs are sorted, of course, we throw the whole expensive and now fairly workable system away and start again.
Because software people have become so obsessed with replacement rather than improvement, we now see huge, very complicated support code libraries devoted purely to the task of making this replacement faster and easier. The result, all too often, is sluggish, buggy, insecure bloat. Look, for example, at something as simple as an ordinary web page: in nearly every case, this simple task is achieved at the cost of thousands of lines of load-on-demand scripting library and code framework bloat. No wonder it's slow and buggy and insecure! No wonder we feel the need to replace the damn thing so rapidly!
The only, repeat only reason we have been able to get away with this gross strategic incompetence is that the hardware wizards keep on delivering massive raw power boosts which serve as enomous subsidies to the dysfunctional and uneconomic software industry.
Well, OK, I'm exaggerating a bit. But only a bit. I'm far closer to the truth of the matter than the software salesman who wrote this
PR department press release article.
(PS: Sometimes new versions of software actually are better. Mostly not, all things considered, especially not when allow for the huge free boost that your new hardware provided, but it does happen. Crikey mo, the latest versions of Photoshop are actually much nicer to use than the likes of CS2 was not so long ago .... but then that was inevitable. Adobe do like to change things and it wasn't as if anything they could do would have actually made it worse. The only way left to go was up. But it still only functions at all because of doubled and redoubled hardware.)
(PPPS: try running some nice old software on modern hardware. Fast? Responsive? We are talking instant!)