This article from 2013 might give an indication on why some people choose FOSS even when they can afford the non-FOSS solutions:
The licensing. My God, the licensing. It's not so much the money, as the infernal, mind-bending tax code level complexity involved in making sure all your software is properly licensed: determining what 'level' and 'edition' you are licensed at, who is licensed to use what, which servers are licensed... wait, what? Sorry, I passed out there for a minute when I was attacked by rabid licensing weasels.
I'm not inclined to make grand pronouncements about the future of software, but if anything kills off commercial software, let me tell you, it won't be open source software. They needn't bother. Commercial software will gleefully strangle itself to death on its own licensing terms.
Interesting. Using that query on Google Denmark (google.com/?gl=dk) gives a more plausible answer, Van Maaren, but Google US (google.com/?gl=us) gives the wrong answer, Miep Gies.
>Those records show that child mortality remained high. But if a man got to the age of 21 and didn’t die by accident, violence or poison, he could be expected to live almost as long as men today: from 1200 to 1745, 21-year-olds would reach an average age of anywhere between 62 and 70 years
If you dig further you can see that these numbers are about male aristocracy in England between 1200 and 1745:
https://blog.codinghorror.com/why-ruby/