One common counter argument that people make is that users are lazy when you say they don't want to learn something new(lets ignore the physically challenged fo

One common counter argument that people make is that users are lazy when you say they don't want to learn something new(lets ignore the physically challenged for now). But that argument is so fallacious I think. What users actually mean is- for the delta value this new feature provides, it is not worth their time to learn to do this the new way. Everybody has to make judicious choice on where they choose to spend their time. And in that vein I dont think the users are being lazy in saying that it is not really efficient if they have to spend significant amount of time learning something new in what they perceive to be of little added value. EDIT: BTW I do think that people are happy to relearn something if they perceive it to provide a "significant" added value. Hypothetically speaking if I had to relearn driving and this "new way of driving" took me from NY to DC in an HR for the same cost, I would try to learn that in a heartbeat. But I dont want to learn a new way of driving if it reduces my drive time by only 15 min. I also think software/CS needs a school of thought that discourages significant change/variation in UX design. But unfortunately most people are incentivsed for change.