Reply to post: "The problem isn't lack of software alternatives, the problem is lack of will to change"

"The problem isn't lack of software alternatives, the problem is lack of will to change"

No, often the problem is exactly the lack of alternatives. A software that "somewhat looks to have almost the same features" is not an alternative. In a business environment, changes are evaluated against costs. If a "change" means higher sw/hw costs, more time spent for a given task, lower quality, compatibility and interoperability issues, retraining costs, etc. the change is obviously "bad".

Then there's custom software written for Windows only, and which is simply too expensive to rewrite for a different platform.

For example my small personal example, I have a large number of RAW images which are managed, processed and printed in Lightroom. I could switch to macOS (but look at the state of Mac Pros, and their costs), but I won't switch to any platform for which Lightroom is not available natively because I really have nor the will nor the time to re-process thousands of images from scratch again.

I'm not saying nor Windows nor Lightroom are the "best choice" - just it's what I deemed a "good one" years ago, and now the investment is simply too large to allow for an easy change.

And in many similar ways, I guess many business have similar situations. MS knows this and is trying to exploit it - I hope eventually it will be unsuccessful, and real alternatives arise - but developing alternatives is expensive too.

"Whiners" are also those who spend too much time telling others they have to switch to <put your preferred software here>, and can't understand why they may not want to switch to the obviously perfect choice they made - of course under completely different conditions...