I’ve encountered this in my career, at many places. Sadly, early in my career, I participated in some of this.
You are a zealot for a particular form of tech if you can see it do no wrong, and decry reports of issues or problems as “attacks”. You are a zealot against a particular form of tech if you cannot see it as a potentially useful and valuable portion of a solution stack, and (often gleefully) amplify reports of issues or problems.
Worse is the denial aspect though. Handwaving away real issues as somebody-elses-problem when you are pro-specific tech, and assigning fault for often poorly thought out or implemented bits when you are anti-specific tech.
This … really … gets old.
Tech is a tool. It either works well for a use case, or it doesn’t. You always want to be on the lookout for new tech that might help, without excluding it based upon your own biases.
I’ve used many OSes over 30+ years. From DOS, Windows, OS2, many unices. I have preferences, but I am not wedded to any one in particular.
I do object when people cast misplaced aspersions on tech, or misrepresent things to try to sway decision making. This reveals more of their own issues than the tech’s issues.
I do object that when shown clear, and unambiguous evidence of core issues, that some people refuse to make the mental leap to accept that their favorite tech may be a source of problems.
This wastes everyone’s time.
Sadly this results in bad decisions which result in years of technical debt. This technical debt may have huge momentum, and not be something you can unwind.
Just because of someone’s bias.
Yeah, it gets real damn old.