I think this cuts both ways.
In my case I came from the opposite direction. The first time I learned economics was through conventional lens of what's considered as the "norm" in modern economics, where Austrian economics is largely dismissed for the reason you point out. All economics books do cover Austrian economics but they are still biased against them so if you're a newbie, you come away thinking "OK these classical and Austrian economics theories are interesting in theory but I guess practically they don't work and it's outdated and nowadays it's all about Keynesian".
So coming from this point of view, reading this book did open my eyes, even though I knew exactly what the book talks about even before reading the book. I guess the general tone of the book was very effective in giving me a balanced point of view, since I at the time had a biased view towards Keynesian.
My current point of view is that there is no right or wrong answer, but there is only difference in context. In certain contexts Austrian way of thinking makes more sense, in certain contexts Keynesian makes more sense.
But it's looking more and more likely that it's time for Austrian economics to shine in the next decade, because of trends like globalization, increasing chaos in the world, and cryptocurrency.