What this article refers to are "some bugs". And while corporate inertia can play a part, bugs get ignored for all kinds of reasons. It's very hard to be generalistic about this.
For example, some bugs aren't fixed because they are very hard to duplicate. When a bug only happens rarely it's hard to debug it, and harder to know that the fix is working.
Others are related to external environmental factors. Thing like AV behaving badly, or interacting with the machine in weird ways.
Sometimes the bug report is so vague, and lacking in detail, that frankly it's useless. I can't count the number of "what have I done wrong" questions which seem to think I'm psychic.
Some bugs are hard. Very hard. Folks have a crack at it, but after some time give up, and move onto other things. Often in these cases the "fix" can be worse than the bug, having various side effects and so on.
In some cases bugs are left in, because to fix them would be to break other things. For example bugs in say the C standard library, if fixed, might break programs that depend on, or work-around, that bug.
This is the tip of the iceberg, there are almost as many reasons as there are bugs outstanding.
And yes, there are very corporate reasons regarding resource allocation that prioritizes some bugs over others, or new features over bugs.