I feel the same way with Unix/Linux. At one point I was told that my organization may be migrating away from Linux, and redeploy everything under Windows. The management layer really couldn't understand that they would lose nearly every Linux admin on staff (that happened to also have deep understanding of their apps and infrastructure). "Why would someone have a problem with switching platforms -- we'll provide you the training" was their answer. Fortunately we were able to come up with a number of technical (and cost related) issues that the project was shot down.
Companies with large and complex db installations often need the complexity for various reasons that are difficult to escape, even if you're working on a green field project.
Of course if you don't need any of these additional tools or can't afford them, then yeah pg is a great choice.
Aside from the raw cost, the licensing model and cost considerations can drive design decisions. In my experience, most shops that use MSSQL do so because nobody on staff has experience with other databases.
If you're a small 2-5 person team, sure. But once dev payroll breaks $1M/yr, paying ~$100k for SQL Server doesn't seem so bad anymore.
I have yet to encounter a team that would rather have SQL Server than another developer given the explicit choice between the two (assuming easy migration, etc.).
I've only interacted with Analysis Services and Reporting Services for maybe five minutes, but the impression I was left with is that they're extremely clunky, even by Windows standards. I also remember a weird situation with SSL wildcard certificate configuration, where the interface said the configuration wasn't applied, but it actually was.
My client subcontracts this to a supposedly "expert DBA" shop, and they always seem to take ages to do what look like simple things on the surface. (I rarely if ever interact with them, so I don't know whether they're actually competent or not.)
They probably do if you have certain needs, but at lots of places they seem to be the basis for solutions that would be far less complicated (and maintainable with a far more common skillset) without them.
Tools like Airflow and Druid are just now getting to where those tools were in 2005 ... unfortunately those tools haven't done much since about 2015 when Azure became the new hotness.
IME, that “deep experience” often means “a very expensive support contract and internal technical staff who walk through decade+ out of date cargo cult rituals by rote without understanding the rationale and why it has been gone longer than they've been employed”.