Simple enough on using and why. However here I really don't agree.
Also, as more SQL Server databases grow, there will be more and more DBAs that come from other products to work with SQL Server. These DBAs will likely write SQL code that is more SQL-92 standard and will not include the T-SQL legacy code words.
The reason is cast still has too many limitations to it with formating (style) which need to be addressed. For example many Oracle DBAs use to_char and to_date where they can write to_date(dateFld,'mm/dd/yyyy hh:mmPM') to generate a specific style. Also products similar to Oracle have not to my knowledge adopted CAST as of yet. So what, IMHO, you will see is that the first time they have to use CONVERT to reach a goal and realize that it will work in all cases (even if they loss some persision) they will tend towards it. I had in the past been real bad about using CONVERT and only recently (last year or so) broke myself of it.
I do agree that ultimately the goal should be move to CAST but there needs to either be a style of available so we can just drop convert or it may be hard coming to get everyone, no matter what.
"Don't roll your eyes at me. I will tape them in place." (Teacher on Boston Public)