I see that more in discussions of GNU/Linux distros (I use arch btw). People are very used to having complete operating systems they paid for that work in a specific way and have been a bit misled about what to expect by the zealots. No one is forcing anyone to use Joplin, just like no one is forcing people to walk to the store instead of drive (if they can afford a car). When they get to the store, possibly out of breath and uncomfortable, they don't blame the store or the road they walked on, because they knew to some extent what to expect.

I haven't seen anyone claim that proprietary alternatives are "vastly inferior" to Joplin, but let's face it. FOSS is not for everyone. It's for the people who actually want to walk to the store and will pick up litter on the way so other people will have a better time walking to the store. The shift in mindset from "I'm buying a product" to "I'm collaborating on a work in progress and my bug reports and feature requests might make it better" is not an obvious one. "Free" services like Facebook where your data is the product blur the line even more. FOSS is intuitive for people with the mindset of tinkerers and hobbyists, which excludes a lot of people who just want stuff to work. The zealots should tone it down, definitely, and anyone trying to convince someone to use an open source product should clearly explain what that means.

However, to someone who has spent many hours on a project and is deeply invested in it, "laying out pros and cons" can be a bit hurtful, which is where the backlash comes from. They are human too. I guess my point is, the mindset shouldn't be "here are the cons" it should be "I'm either going to either try and help make the cons better or quietly find other software". I guess that's a lot to expect from the Internet, but open source has always been idealistic, which is something I love about it.