People are complaining about having to switch apps. Users have found something that works and they've gotten used to it. Now they'll be forced to switch for no apparent value add. Why do you think people would be okay with that?
It's a general statement on the world that people hate all change :)
People have always argued literally every change has no value add for them (and i'm sure for large enough things, there are always people for which that is true).
So that part doesn't bug me.
But that's not what most of the comments seem to be. Because honestly, if the only complaint people have is "i had to open a different app", that's actually really good for any transition.
- causes uncertainty (will this still work?);
- often comes at an inconvenient time;
- requires the user to re-learn the software;
- might cause incompatibilities with existing tools.
No wonder people mostly don't like updates, especially if they are forced upon them, and if the advantages are not clear.
Imho, to address the above points, software should let the user decide when they perform the update, and the user should always be allowed to switch back. Note that this might require data to be migrated back and forth, but of course that's the vendor's problem.