Actually that wasn't your original statement, though it seems reasonable to clarify that you're talking about people moving to SQL Server 2008 more quickly than they moved to SQL Server 2005 if that is what you meant.

Just a reminder that I said your original statement may be correct in the more general way you made it. Not sure why you imply that anybody denied your new version of the statement. All I saw was Mike asking for a citation.

Also a reminder that even the most copious anecdote is not a citation. Anecdote often carries bias. For example: did you or your firm comment at the time that the uptake of 2005 was slow? Can you point to a UT thread where you provided this detail? No? Then perhaps we should not be expected to rely on what firms do or don't say when it advantages themselves.

Also there is the issue of selection bias. Your firm touts itself for various products and services. People who want your services approach you. People who do not want your services- for example, because they are not planning to upgrade- may never be seen by you. And employers wanting new staff are unlikely to say they plan to stay with 2000 when asked.

Happy to discuss any of these issues, bot not to be shoehorned into a new version of your statement so you can rebut more effectively. That's boring.