> What is important is the outcome, not the tool.

Productivity can also matter: if one tool allows you to get outcome X in 2 hours, but with another it takes 6 hours (or 20 vs 60 minutes), that can also be important.

When taking into account productivity, you have to take into account the loss of productivity of using Windows. I know that because I changed job and have recently been asked to work on a windows machine after a decade on Linux and the time lost every day is huge. To the point I am considering looking for a new job and would probably be willing to lower my income in favor of happiness in my day to day use of the tools.

Also you have to separate the professionals, the hobbyists and the vanity users.

The 1st population has very strong productivity requirements.

For the 2nd population the decision comes down to motivation. As a hobbyist I don't care if it takes me a few minutes more to process an image because my livelihood doesn't depend on it and I know how to appreciate the effort made by the volunteers that are building such a useful product and release it both for free and under an opensource license that nobody can pry out of my hands. The same way my more practical to maintain (because external cable routing) road bicycle is a better option for me and I don't need to ride the same aero bike as the Tour de France winner because those couple of watts gained here and here would only makes me reach home 2 minutes earlier without making the activity any more enjoyable.

It is not worth trying to convince the 3rd population, these are the ones who will buy an Ipad Pro instead of the base model only to use it to doom scroll social medias or lookup kitchen recipes. They just want the perceived best of everything and will look down as anything less than a status symbol.