Exactly.
I have a relative that was still using my old Win 98se Dell, that I gave her 8 years ago, up to the begining of last year. She never went on the net and only did word processing and played a few games. I would imagine there is an army of people that are like this with XP.
I still use Windows XP and it does absolutely everything I need it to do (video editing, music, desktop publishing, 2D and 3D graphics, emulation, word processing, internet) - and I would say that I am a more intensive computer user than your average homeowner who just uses his/her computer for e-mail/internet and the occassional game.
I also have a couple of highly useful applications (i.e. Windows 98 era) which will still run on Windows XP but apparently won't run on later version of Windows.
I hope to be able to continue using XP even past 2014 if possible - I certainly still continue to use AmigaOS and I did use Windows 98 long past its support date (until about 2007).
In fact, I've been thinking about what will happen when / if I actually need to upgrade my hardware. I'd like to find a more modern system that will STILL run Windows XP - mainly for the sole attraction of the additional CPU cores that will make my existing video editing software etc. even faster.
I wonder if you could even take a machine manufactured in 2012/2013, wipe the more modern OS and install Windows XP on it.
I have heard about the virtual machine support in the new versions of Windows. This seems good.
I'm not really concerned about lack of software support once XP is no longer supported my MicroSoft - heck, if I did I wouldn't be using Amiga stuff as well. I'm sure there will be a huge body of independent users and programmers still supporting Windows XP (you can still find good support and modern applications / hacks for Windows 98 if you look).
I've always been a fan of older software. For example, I think a hard working, creative person can do more with an older version of Photoshop (or, heck, even DPaint) then a less motivated person can do with the latest cutting edge version.
So - is the ONLY really compelling reason to upgrade to a later version of Windows (if you're happy with older software) the lack of security patches?