Right.
Over and over I hear this from people who've clearly never managed a business environment where you have entrenched processes.
Or processes dependent upon specific software that has no Linux counterpart (CAD).
Even if an org could switch desktops to Linux, there's a massive cost just in the switching, then making sure it all works, then the lost production as employees figure out new ways to do things they've done for years.
Then what happens when you take on a new client or new vendor who only works with "this thing" that only works through windows? Now you have to spend time and money validating whatever solution you develop, instead of just using "the thing" which has already been validated through years of use by that ient/vendor and their clients/vendors.
Or when you're dealing with regulatory processes that have been addressed througjout your industry with a specific set of Windows tools, and those tools have been approved/validated by the regulatory agency or insurance agencies - and now you need to get the same process validated under Linux with Linux tools, hoping the regulators or insurers won't just say "nope, not interested".
BTDT, with alternate Windows tooling, and just got shut down because existing tools were available. "Why would you want to use a different tool when X process/tooling exists?"
It's just not realistic, even for many small orgs.