Those people don't pay you $$$, so in exchange for cheaper / faster eng costs, you pay via lower quality software.
In businesses that would actually pay slack money, they will probably pay $800 for a decent enough laptop to run slack every 4 years and employees bring their own smartphones now.
Capitalists also have financial incentives to prioritize against environmental concerns, and yet raising a criticism about a business's practices that neglect to take environmental impact into account isn't out of hand an unreasonable thing to do on the basis that addressing it would mean higher costs to the business. It's a reasonable criticism that reasonable people can have opposing perspectives on and find it worthwhile to talk about, rather than being immediately dismissed.
(I also don't see anything in this comment that actually addresses the accessibility metaphor raised by the person you're responding to.)
In businesses that would actually pay slack money, they will probably pay $800 for a decent enough laptop to run slack every 4 years and employees bring their own smartphones now.