In my opinion, people associate cost with value. Something that's free MUST be worse than something that costs thousands of dollars.
And its not a hour, even if you know other solutions. I guess in this sort of discussion, that is considered a defeat of the "opponent" - winning by him/her admitting in anecdata that he/she is stupid enough to take this or that longer to learn. Unfortunately feeling smart , doesn't help the cause of open source one iota.
I always wondered, why some people get full zealot for open source? Does explaining the problems away, instead of building a user-friendly OS/ 3D editing Software, supplies some sort of elitist "invites only Treehouse" kick?
The down-side is that most people don't appreciate this, instead they just bitch about right click to select and give up.
That said, a lesson often forgotten (or perhaps never acquired in the first place) is that learning requires some minimum structure, discipline and focus. To give you an example - I've been shying away from learning Paredit for about two or three years of my Lisp coding experience. Then one day I decided, "fuck it", I'm taking time to focus on learning it. It only took two pomodoros - literally less than an hour, and yes, I timed it - of reviewing the documentation and practicing (I took a big function, stripped the structure out with M-x replace-str to remove all parens, and then restored the structure using only Paredit operations) to become pretty proficient in the mode, and now I'm that much faster in working on Lisp code.
I've repeated this experience several times in various places - it's surprising just how much you can learn in an hour if you actually focus on it. Sometimes you have to invent your own exercises, but then again, maybe you have to learn how to learn first :). And yes, I do explicitly schedule time for "learning how to learn" in areas I'm not very familiar with, in order to make the actual learning more efficient :).
--
As for getting full zealot for open source - I do agree it's an existing phenomenon. But at least in my arguments for Blender and Emacs, be sure it's not open source zealotry. I'll argue just as strong for Microsoft Word and Microsoft Excel, and against OpenOffice. The latter just sucks, in a death-from-thousand-papercuts way. So does Linux as a desktop for non-tech people. Open Source seems to be a negative predictor for quality for tools that are a) above some level of complexity, and b) not for developers.
Still, my primary argument is - a powerful tool will necessarily have a learning curve; the longer and steeper the more powerful a tool is. You can try and make this curve easier to traverse, but ultimately you can't flatten it in any other way than by making the tool less powerful and less useful.
Or don't and just bitch about elitism. Up to you!
Like it or not, i fight for the users! Better to bitch about things that could change- then instead of bitching about ignorant users not adapting to once comandline User Interface for Ecell . Because you wont train everyone into a coder.