Your analogy would only be true if the 1950 Buick parts used the same technology as cars made today. They obviously wouldn't, they'd be made to 1950 standards. The Icon may technically be "last year's tech" but it is still on par with any phone out there right now. There is nothing available that can be put in phones for sale today that is any better. I think that is the point others are trying to make. 
However, the fact is, many of us prefer to use the latest technology, and the latest technology is projected to be available the first half of 2014 on Android phones (using the Snapdragon 805, for example, which is a significant step up from the 800). In this I absolutely agree, the Lumia Icon (929) is in danger of becoming a second-class phone before it is actually released, or only slightly before better Windows phones are released on ATT. In a few months the fact that the Icon uses 2013 tech will not only be true in a technical sense, it will be true in a user sense because there will be more technically advanced options for those of us such a thing matters to.
The 1520 brings Win 8 phones into parity with Android and iOS devices. It is a leading-edge phone right now, but it was released months after the Android phones of the same hardware quality were released. Unfortunately it isn't going to capture many Android users because 1) even though it has caught up it is still behind the technology curve in terms of actual release date, and 2) it is a 6" device, which many consider to be a "phablet", too large to be a convenient to carry phone.
The Icon, though, fits in a size that many more mainstream users consider usable, and some consider optimal. Verizon releasing this phone is more important than Verizon, Microsoft, and Nokia seem to think. All 3 of them simply aren't doing what needs to be done to inform people of the fact that these phones are equal to or better than any other phone on the market, worthy of being called a flagship phone by anyone.
Many people still think of Windows phones as second-rate at best. No one wants to buy a second-rate device, even if they are buying a cheaper version. Most hardware manufacturers understand this; they understand the need to provide cutting-edge tech because it just doesn't effect sales to those that buy cutting-edge, but the whole consumer base.
Verizon is the leader in terms of internet connectivity (in the U.S.). Verizon is the leader in terms of cell phone service. Why should Verizon shoot themselves in the proverbial foot by providing second tier devices, or devices that are an answer to ATT's offerings released months after ATT gets all the attention for the new products?
What really bugs me though is not being informed. I mean, if you have contractual obligations that prevent you from saying anything else, you can at least tell your customers - and potential customers with cash in hand waiting to buy your devices AND service - that much.
Why can't we have something like this (This is NOT an official statement, just an example of what they could do.): "Verizon released a statement today explaining that they cannot inform the public of any devices that may be released for use on their cell phone bandwidths because of contractual obligations. The spokesperson said agreements Verizon has to make in order to get new and current smart phones are influenced by contractual agreements that Verizon must make in order to acquire the new devices from the companies that make them. Verizon cannot make an official statement regarding the release of the rumored Nokia Lumia Icon because of these contracts."
See? That's all they would need to do to stop me from being frustrated with Verizon. It is all they would need to do to stop me from going ahead and buying a 1520 and signing up for ATT service instead of paying for Verizon service. It would be better if they could give us a date of course, but if they can't they can't. As it stands now though, we don't even know whether they can or not and so all the "blame" is put on them.
This doesn't just effect whether or not we have the latest Windows phones now. We have to decide what service we are going to be using for the next year or more to make any phone purchase we make. For me, this means who am I going to give my money to for at least the next year, Verizon, ATT, or T-Mobile? That best personal business decision can't be made without knowing the facts needed to make a good choice. Surely someone at Verizon understands that much. Surely someone at Verizon understands that most people aren't going to switch carriers unless they are really unhappy with the one they have, so if I buy ATT service I am much less likely to switch to Verizon after a year unless I have a really bad experience with ATT.
Link to an official announcement saying the phone is coming out in March?
Rumors are rumors, and if that's what you are going by, well, I point out how often the "leaked" release date was wrong for the Icon. It would have been out before the 1520 if the first rumored release date had been correct!
I'd love to see it happen, even if I've already bought an Icon, but I'm very skeptical because it is unlikely Nokia would even have the Snapdragon 805 to build the phones with and get them out in the first quarter. Projected releases for products using that SoC is second quarter 2014 - so, April at the earliest, and I wouldn't expect the first phones of any kind until closer to June. It would be a real coup for Microsoft to be the first one to have a phone using it, I think that would make a lot of people sit up and take notice, but "I'll believe it when I see it". I've played this dang waiting game for hardware too many times; the Icon fits my specs for a smart phone and I'll be happy with it regardless of how soon it will be technically "out of date".
