Sure, people, including myself, do find the familiar appealing. But you can't extrapolate that to assume that any/most preference for existing standards is based on that instead of an actual understanding of which standard one prefers.

It would be equally wrong and cynical for me to discount opinions for imagined reasons like, people who fit a younger or tech-friendly profile latch on to new technologies for the sake of being cutting edge, or that people in an industry that benefits from adoption of web apps would be biased towards Google apps. (Though the temptation exists.)

I don't think I've ever disagreed with a statement that stated "System A is different than System B, and I prefer {A/B} because I find it easier to use." My comment simply disagrees with adding an unqualified ranking to a system. "A is inferior", "B is superior" without some definition of an exemplar. Someone could say "Windows Office is superior to Google Apps when working on documents without network connectivity." That is a ranking, and a basis for the ranking. I can agree or disagree with the choice but I understand it.

To the extent that I could understand it, the OP argument was that it was worse because it was different. And it is that claim I disagree strongly with.

I agree with you and have often thought that this dynamic drives programmer psychology as well. It explains a lot about, e.g., programming language adoption, that is puzzling otherwise.