Doesn't really need a diagram. They're simply saying that, if you assume that the benefit/ease/etc. of switching to Linux is constantly increasing, then the best time to switch would always be at some later time, because it will always be easier/more beneficial/etc. in the future.
If it's always the case that there's never been a better time to switch to Linux, and we can assume the trend will continue, that means that there will always be a near future time where it will be better to switch to Linux than it is right now. That means it's better to switch to Linux later.
It tells you more something about how lazy and lethargic the average consumer is. How hot and fast you can boil the water of that particular frog species before it even starts to think of jumping ship.
As long as X game with horrible anti-cheat and Y commercial software with a million dollar monopoly on its polish works the average windows user just does not care what Microsoft does.
So I switched to Linux a couple of weeks ago, got fedora set up, connected to WiFi and then set up proprietary Nvidia drivers. It wanted to reboot to so whatever is needed with secure boot.
When it came back I couldn’t use the internet or get it to connect again.
I’m a software engineer and a massive nerd. It ain’t as easy as just switch and problem solved.
Now it did get me interested in setting it up again with Arch, but let’s not pretend Linux is anywhere near as user friendly as MacOS or Windows. It is for nerds and will always be that way because it doesn’t just work out of the box.
Kinda sick of seeing all the disingenuous arguments that are pro Linux.