Should the Bible contain the Old Testement?

Isn't the O.T. necessary to provide context for the N.T.? Many N.T. passages are (allegedly) quoted from the O.T. I don't think you can really understand what some N.T. passages are really supposed to be about unless you have the O.T. That's one reason why I don't like "Bibles" that are only New Testaments.

Very often, when a new translation or version of the Bible comes out, the New Testament comes first. It is usually easier to translate, since it comes from Greek, a European language distantly related to English, rather than Hebrew, a Semitic language unrelated to Greek or English. Also, the NT is shorter than the Old Testament, so you can get a complete part of the Bible on the market sooner.Of course, it is also possible to divide the OT up into sections, such as the Psalms and/or Proverbs, the Pentateuch, the Prophets, etc., and sell or distribute them separately.IMHO, while it is possible to use "only" the NT, it seems incomplete to use it without the OT. Besides, why call it the New Testament if there isn't also an Old one?